Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR, J
SMT. NARAYANAMMA W/O VIRUPAKHSHA REDDY – Appellant
Versus
H. MANIKYA REDDY S/O VENKATA REDDY – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. remand for fresh consideration. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. plaintiff's absence and document issues. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. importance of fair trial and substantial justice. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. details on further directions for survey. (Para 10) |
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR)
2. For the sake of convenience and easy reference, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court.
4. Against dismissal of the suit, the plaintiff has filed Regular Appeal before the First Appellate Court and the First Appellate Court has allowed the appeal by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court and remanded with observations, by appointing Court Commissioner to do certain things. This order is under challenge by the defendant.
6. Furthermore, the plaintiff has produced certified copy of the sale deed. As per case of the defendant, the plaintiff has not laid foundation for leading secondary evidence. Whether, foundation was laid or not and according to it, whether secondary evidence is to be considered or not is the question for consideration before the Trial Court.
8. When a comprehensive suit for declaration is filed, technicaliti
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
