IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
Divi Satya Sayee Babu – Appellant
Versus
Late Smt. M Sridevi since died per LR – Respondent
ORDER :
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J.
This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed against the order dated 30.04.2024 in CMA.No.10 of 2024, passed by the X Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at LB Nagar (hereinafter referred to as the ‘First Appellate Court’), confirming the order of interim injunction dated 15.12.2023 in IA.No.277 of 2019 in OS No.64 of 2019 passed by the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Trial Court’).
2. The brief facts of the case, as narrated by the petitioners in the affidavit filed in support of the present Civil Revision Petition, are that:
2.1 The petitioners are absolute owners of Acs.3-12 Gts of land located in Survey No.692 of Janwada Village, Shankarpally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District; that the said land was once part of a larger extent held by one Jagannatha Reddy and was cultivated jointly by protected tenants-Potti Lingaiah and Tallari Lakshmaiah and subsequently, by the legal heirs of the Potti/Maheshwaram and Tallari families and were recognized as successors.
2.2 In 1997, under the Telangana Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (for shor
Chandavarkar Sita Ratna Rao vs. Ashalata S. Guram
Mani Nariman Daruwala vs. Phiroz N. Bhatena and others
Baby vs. Travancore Devaswom Board and others
Binodlal Sagarmal and ors. vs. Prem Prakash gupta and ors.
Yeshwant Sakhalkar and anr. vs. Hirabat kamat Mhamai and anr.
Ananthula Sudhakar vs. P. Buchi Reddy and ors.
T.V. Ramakrishna Reddy vs. M. Mallappa and anr.
Saketa Vaksana LLP and ors. vs. Kaukutla Sarala and ors.
Maria Margarida Sequeria Fernandes vs. Erasmo Jack De Sequeira
Kotaiah and anr. vs. Property Association of the Baptist Churches (Pvt) Ltd.
Thota Sridhar Reddy and ors. vs. Mandala Ramulamma and ors.
Venkanna and ors. vs. Pichikuntal Buchamma and ors.
Makkan Lakshmamma vs. Abdul Gafoor
Narangi Bai vs. Yadagiri Bal Raj
Mohd. Qutabuddin vs. Aziz Khan and ors.
V. Ramaswamy vs. The State of Telangana
Rachappa vs. Bhumani Hanumaiah & Anr.
Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. N.R. Vairamani
Veduruthala Seetharamamma vs. Badnath Herija and anr.
Syed Abdul Majeed @ Mia Pasha and ors. vs. Joint Collector – II, RR District and ors.
Boddam Narsimha vs. Hasan Ali Khan & ors.
Jt. Collector RR Dist & anr. vs. D. Narsing Rao & ors.
Chirapareddi Veeramma and ors. vs Sk. Mahaboob Subhani and Ors.
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.