Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. Lakshman, B.R. Madhusudhan Rao, JJ
Gaddam Babaiah – Appellant
Versus
Kadaveru Surendra Mohan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural history and subject matter of the appeal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. legal precedents regarding order 7 rule 11 cpc. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court's scope of inquiry under order 7 rule 11 (plaint must be read as a whole). (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 4. application of law to facts: cause of action and limitation issues. (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53) |
| 5. termination of agency and validity of gpas upon death of principals. (Para 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70) |
| 6. determination of limitation period as a mixed question of fact and law. (Para 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90) |
| 7. final order: setting aside rejection of plaint and expediting trial. (Para 91 , 92 , 93 , 94) |
JUDGEMENT
Heard Mr. M. Radhakrishna, learned counsel representing Sri Rajesh Maddy, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Arun Kumar Agarwal, learned counsel representing Sri R.K.Chitta learned counsel for respon
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
