Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J
Tenugu Kishan – Appellant
Versus
Dr. P. Damodar Reddy – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of property dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. first appellate court's ruling and evidence. (Para 8) |
| 3. court's analysis on ownership and appeal argument. (Para 10 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. defendants' failure to establish their claims. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. legal standards for second appeals. (Para 15 , 16 , 18) |
| 6. outcome and conclusion of the appeal. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT:
The Second Appeal is filed aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated 05.02.2025, passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Sanga Reddy in A.S.No.59 of 2022, by which the judgment and decree, dated 13.06.2018, passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Medak in O.S.No.78 of 2012 was set aside.
2. The appellants herein are defendants and respondent herein is plaintiff in the suit. The parties hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.
3. The brief facts of the case as averred in the plaint are that plaintiff filed suit O.S.No.78 of 2012 seeking perpetual injunction in respect of suit schedule property against defendants. In the plaint it is averred that plaintiff is the owner and pattadar of suit schedule property which is ancestral property and he raised sugar cane crop in the
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
