SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Kar) 836

N.KUMAR
Ramacandra – Appellant
Versus
Vithal – Respondent


ADVOCATES APPEARED:
Sri. G Balakrishna Shastry, Advocate for Petitioners.
Sri. K. Shrihari, Advocate for R2 to 5.

ORDER

Kumar, J

The petitioners have preferred this writ petition challenging the order permitting defendants 3 to 6 to cross-examine PW-1.

2. The first respondent-Vithal is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 53/2005. He filed the suit against the petitioners and respondents 2 to 5 for a declaration that the decree passed in O.S. No. 550/1975 dated 1.1982 is not binding on him, he is in actual peaceful possession of the property and therefore, he sought for the relief of injunction restraining the petitioners herein from disturbing his possession except in accordance with law.

3. O.S. No. 550/1975 was instituted by Yallubai Monappa Marve for a declaration that she is the owner and to restrain Yamunappa Dundappa Marve from disturbing her lawful possession in respect of the suit schedule property. The said Yamunappa Dundappa Marve filed a suit in O.S. No. 429/1973 against Yallubai and sought an injunction. Both the suits were clubbed together and common trial was conducted. O.S. No. 429/1973 came, to be dismissed. O.S. No. 550/1975 came to be decreed. Yamunappa preferred R.A. No. 17/1982 against the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 550/1975.

Appeal came to be dismissed. Yamunappa died. His L.Rs pref





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top