Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Renuka Yara, J
Panuganti Praveena – Appellant
Versus
B. Nagaraj – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of lower court injunction proceedings and appellate remand order. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. conflicting contentions regarding evidentiary appreciation and boundary records. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. appellate courts' duty under s.107 cpc to decide finally rather than remand. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. discretionary modification of injunction orders and maintenance of status quo. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
ORDER:
Heard Ms. K. Annapurna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Palle Sriharinath, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the entire record.
2. The Civil Revision Petition is preferred by the petitioner/plaintiff aggrieved by the order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy District (‘appellate Court’) in C.M.A.No.36 of 2022, wherein an appeal preferred challenging the order dated 11.10.2022 in I.A.No.618 of 2021 in O.S.No.1286 of 2021 on the file of the learned III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Sangareddy Disttrict (‘trial Court’), has been allowed by setting aside the order and remanding the matter back for fresh consideration on merits.
3. The background facts of the case are that the peti
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
