Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 9330
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
Achanta Venkateswarlu – Appellant
Versus
Jagatha Suribabu – Respondent
Second Appeal No: 341 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M Sri Atchyut
For the Respondents: V.V. Ravi Prasad
Court emphasizes the need to maintain status quo on property during ongoing appeal proceedings to prevent potential alienation until the court can review the case.
Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure Code, Sections 100, 39, 1 & 2 - Second Appeal - Appeal filed against the decree and judgment reversing the lower court’s decision - Petition for injunction against the respondents from alienating the suit property during the pending appeal - Court extends interim order. (Paras 1, 2)
(B) Jurisdiction - Appellate Courts' authority in reviewing findings of lower courts - The High Court emphasizes its role in ensuring no errors of law or procedure in the lower courts' judgment. (Paras 2)
Facts of the case:
The appellants have filed a second appeal to reverse the judgment of the lower court which had overturned a previous decree, with petitions for injunction against the respondents' actions concerning the suit property.
Findings of Court:
The court acknowledges the necessity to extend the interim order until a further hearing to safeguard the interests of the appellants regarding the suit property.
Issues: The main issues include the order made by the lower court and the implications of potential alienation of the suit property by the respondents during the appeal period.
Ratio Decidendi: The court notes the importance of maintaining status quo on the suit property until the appeal is resolved, underscoring the need for caution in property matters during litigation.
Result: Interim order granted and extended.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's observation on maintaining interim order during appeal. (Para 2) |
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO SECOND APPEAL NO: 341 OF 2025 Between :
1. Achanta Venkateswarlu, S/o Surya Rao, Aged 55 years, resident of D.No.7-15, Mondivari Street, Payakaraopeta Village and MandaI, Visakhapatnam District.
2. Achanta Narayana Murthy, S/o late Surya Rao, Aged 48 years, resident of D.No.7-15, Mondivari Street, Payakaraopeta Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.
Appellants/Respondents 1 & 2/plaintiffs 1 & 2 AND
1. Jagatha Suribabu, S/o Kondala Rao @ Konda, Aged About-64 years.
Residing at Pathrivari Veedhi, Payakaraopeta Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.
2. Jagathat Veera Venkata Koodeswara Syam Prasad, S/o Jagatha Suribabu, Aged About 35 years, Pathrivari Veedhi, Payakaraopeta Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.
Respondents/Appellants/Defendants
3. Achanta Suryakantham, W/o late Surya Rao Aged 70 years, resident of D.No.7-15, Mondivari Street, Payakaraopeta Village and Mandal Visakhapatnam District. (Died on 17.02.2022)
(Respondent No.3 is only a proforma party and no relief is claimed against the respondent No,3 in the instant appeal)
_ Respondent/Respondent No.3/plaintiff No.3 Second Appeal under Section 1 OO CPC against the order dated may be pleased` to allow the second appeal and set aside the Decree and Judgment dated 30-09-2024 in A.S. No. 304 of 2012 on the file of the XI AddI. District Judge, Visakhapatnam reversing the Decree and Judgment dated 29-10-2012 in O.S. No.114 of 2007 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Yellamanchili in the interests of justice IANO: 2OF2025 Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affl-davit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased may be pleased {o restraint the Respondents/Defendants from alienate the suit schedule property, pending disposal of SA 341 of 2025, on the file of the High Court.
[ANO:3OF2025 Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed. in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to grant injunction against the respondents/defendants herein, their agents and henchmen from restraining the respondents/defendants from making alienations, creating thI'rd Party interests and changing and altering the physical features of the suit schedule Properties, Pending disposal of SA 341 of 2025, on the file of the High Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of the High Court dated 09.05.2025 made herein and upon hearing the arguments of SRI M SRI ATCHYUT Ac!vocate for the Petitioner, Court made the following IIIIII|lll-
`^.die**\`` Le.-.` -.
qui>ng ORDER {£Sri V.V. Ravi Prasad, learned counsel submits that he is filing vakalat for the responclents and seeks time.
Post on o4.07-2025-
Interim order granted earlier is extended till 11|07.2025|7'
