P.NAVEEN RAO
Rapaka Nagaraju – Appellant
Versus
Sudha High School – Respondent
ORDER :
P. Naveen Rao, J.
1. Heard Sri Y. Rama Rao learned counsel for petitioner/defendant No. 1, and Sri J. Kanakaiah learned counsel for respondent No. 1/plaintiff.
2. Parties are referred to as arrayed in the suit.
3. Plaintiff filed O.S. No. 416 of 2020 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge at Jangaon praying to grant decree of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their family members, servants, associates, agents, relatives etc from entering into or interfering in peaceful running of school activity in the school premises described more fully in the schedule appended to the suit plaint (hereinafter referred to as suit schedule property). According to plaintiff, Sudha Educational and Cultural Society was formed and registered in the year 2013 (Reg. No. 788/2013). The society established Sudha High School. In the year 2014 he has acquired suit schedule property on 5 (five) years lease to establish the school in the premises. Lease deed was executed on 26.5.2015 by the owner of the property Sri Rapaka Sudhakar. It is his case that lease was subsequently extended. Initially school was established to impart education upto 7th class, subsequently permission is gr
Saleem Bhai and others Vs. State of Maharashtra
Hardesh Ores Pvt. Ltd vs. Hede and Company
Liverpool & London S.P. & I Assn. Ltd. v. M.V. Sea Success I
Popat and Kotecha Property v. State Bank of India Staff Assn.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.