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

2008 Supreme(AP) 1109

N.V.RAMANA
V. Narayana Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Ani Narayanan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. V. Ramachander Goud, Counsel for the Petitioner.
Mr. M. Radha Krishna, Counsel for the Respondents.

ORDER

This C.R.P. is directed against the order dated 13.12.2007, passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, dismissing the application in I.A. No. 4040 of 2007 in O.S. No. 1500 of 2002, filed by the petitioner seeking to get himself impleaded as plaintiff NO.2 in the suit and all interlocutory applications, on the ground that he is a proper and necessary party, and permit necessary amendments.

2. The petitioner filed the present application seeking to implead himself as plaintiff No.2 inter alia stating that the plaintiff originally filed the suit for perpetual injunction against the defendant-respondent No.2 with respect to the suit schedule property on 11.10.2002 and continued to prosecute the same. That the plaintiff-respondent No.1, is a senior citizen aged about 75 years and is now permanently settled in Chennai. He states that he had advanced hand loan of Rs.25,00,000/- to the plaintiff-respondent No.1, which she agreed to repay after sale of the suit schedule property. That thereafter, she proposed and agreed to sell to the suit schedule property to him for a total sale consideration of Rs.35,00,000/-. Accepting the said proposal, the petitioner state























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