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

K. SREENIVASA REDDY
K. Subbarayudu Naidu – Appellant
Versus
K. Subba Naidu – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Vajjhala Satyanarayana Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent:Umesh Chandra P V G, Advocate

ORDER (COMMON)

A.S.No.526 of 2021 is preferred challenging the Judgment and Decree dated 28.03.2011 passed in Original Suit No.17 of 2003 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Kadapa.

2. 1st respondent in the A.S. filed the aforesaid suit against appellants in the A.S., seeking partition of the plaint schedule properties into three equal shares and to allot one such share to him. Vide the Judgment dated 28.03.2011, the trial Court decreed the suit, passing a preliminary decree, declaring that 1st respondent/plaintiff is entitled for 1/3rd share in the suit schedule properties.

3. In the Appeal Suit, vide Order dated 25.08.2011 in A.S.M.P.No.1830 of 2011, this Court granted stay of passing of final decree alone, by observing that all other proceedings may go on.

4. During pendency of the A.S., appellant No.1 and sole respondent died. Appellants 4 to 6 were brought on record as legal representatives of deceased appellant No.1, vide Order dated 24.03.2023 in I.A.No.4 of 2022. Respondents 2 to 4 were brought on record as legal representatives of deceased respondent, vide Order dated 24.03.2023 in I.A.No.6 of 2022.

5. For sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred

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