SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(AP) 767

V.V.S.RAO
Binodlal Sagarmal, Hyderabad – Appellant
Versus
Prem Prakash Gupta – Respondent


V. V. S. RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE first petitioner is a firm and petitioners 2 and 3 are its partners. They are tenants of mulgi bearing No. 1-2-174, charkaman, Hyderabad, owned by the respondents. In 1985, the second petitioner along with two others filed a suit for specific performance of agreement of sale alleged to have been executed by one Madanlal Gupta in respect of mulgies bearing No. 21-2-172, 173 and 174, Charkaman, Hyderabad. The second petitioner along with one devakinandam filed O. S. No. 2587 of 1985 (later numbered as O. S. No. 307 of 1993) on the file of the IV Additional Judge, City civil Court, Hyderabad against respondents 1 and 2 for perpetual injunction restraining them from changing the nature of the suit schedule premises. The Trial Court, by a common judgment dated 16-2-1994 decreed both the suits in favour of the petitioners. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree respondents and others filed first appeals before this Court being C. C. C. A. Nos. 39, 41, 194, 47 of 1994 and 49 of 1997.

( 2 ) WHILE the suits were pending, respondents filed R. C. No. 812 of 1987 on the file of the I Additional Rent Controller, hyderabad seeking eviction of the petitioners on groun




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top