Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
T.VINOD KUMAR
Banavath Sravanthi – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
ORDER :
(T. VINOD KUMAR, J.)
This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in passing the order, dt.08.03.2019, in OS.No.112 of 2010 on the file of the Agent of the Government-2nd respondent, as being illegal and contrary to the order of this Court, dt.17.04.2013 in CRP.No.400 of 2013, with a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent to club O.S.No.112 of 2010 and O.S.No.151 of 2011 on the file of the Special Assistant Agent to Government-cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate(Mobile Court) at Bhadrachalam-3rd respondent, and conduct common trial in both the suits.
2. Heard Smt K.V.Raja Sri, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare for respondent Nos.1 to 5, Sri K.Durga Prasad, learned counsel for unofficial respondent Nos.6 to 9, and perused the record.
3. The brief facts giving rise to filing of the present writ petition are that, the petitioner claims to have purchased land admeasuring Acres 5.00 gunts in survey No.154/JA situated at Chaperlapalli Revenue Village, Mulkalapally Mandal, Khammam District, from the 8th respondent under an agreement of sale, dt.03.12.2009; that the 6th respondent is also claiming the same said
A party must inform the court of any relevant prior orders and actively participate in proceedings; failure to do so disallows later challenges to outcomes.
A court assessing an application under Order VII Rule 11 is confined to the plaint and its documents, not external assertions or documents.
The court affirmed that the lower court's failure to verify legal titles and adherence to land transfer regulations invalidated its injunction order, demonstrating the significance of procedural corr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of examination under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC and the party's prerogative to choose the documents to be brought on record.
Sale deeds executed without permission under Section 22 of the OLR Act are void ab initio, and possession claimed based on such deeds cannot establish title through adverse possession.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
