SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top