KATURI VEERRAJU – Appellant
Versus
TANINKI SATYANARAYANA – Respondent
COMMON ORDER:
Both the C.R.Ps. are filed by JDRs 9 to 13; while C.R.P.No.1224 of 2019 is filed against the order in E.A.No.58 of 2019 in E.P.No.22 of 2018 dismissing the application to stay the executing proceedings, the other C.R.P.No.2839 of 2019 is filed against the order dated 21.02.2019 allowing the E.P.No.22 of 2018 and issuing warrant against JDRs 9 to 13 to commit them to civil prison for violation of injunction decree in O.S.No.1 of 2000.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the two C.R.Ps. can be said to be filed in the following background:
a) O.S.No.1 of 2000 was filed by respondent/DHR/plaintiff on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem, initially against defendants 1 and 2, who are his father and elder sister, seeking perpetual injunction decree in respect of plaint schedule tiled house and its appurtenant site. Pending suit, as the 1st defendant died, his L.Rs. were brought on record as defendants 3 to 8. Defendants 2 to 8 filed written statement and contested the suit. The trial Court in para 13 of its judgment, while categorically holding that the plaintiff was in continuous lawful possession of the schedule property, granted the decree in his favour
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.