Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
J. SREENIVAS RAO, J
Dr.Pamidi Venkateshwarlu – Appellant
Versus
P.Ramesh Kumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction invoked under article 227 in civil revision petition. (Para 1 , 5 , 9) |
| 2. court delineates the necessity of substantial grounds for rejecting the plaint. (Para 2 , 3 , 8) |
| 3. claims regarding limitation and cause of action must be substantiated during trial. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 4. established judicial precedents regarding plaint evaluation. (Para 7) |
Order:
This Civil Revision Petition is filed invoking the provisions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order and decree dated 28.11.2024 passed by the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy in I.A.No.284 of 2024 in O.S.No.61 of 2017.
2. Heard Mr.V.Ramu, learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. This Civil Revision Petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. Hence, notice in respect of respondent is dispensed with.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent/plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.61 of 2017 for recovery of Rs.1,04,22,870/- against the petitioner/defendant before the Court below on 07.12.2011. In the said suit, the plaintiff has not specifically mentioned the cause of action and the suit filed by the respondent is barred by li
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
