AI Overview...
- Damage and Damage Suit Schedule - Several sources discuss damages related to suit schedule properties, including claims for damages, destruction, or repairs. For example, N. Anantha Reddy VS Anshu Kathuria - Supreme Court mentions a prayer for perpetual injunction to prevent demolition or damage to the property, emphasizing that the plaintiff did not claim any right, interest, or ownership in the property. Similarly, FOR EXTENSION OF TIME K. SRINIVASA RAO VS N. RAMACHANDRAMURTHY - Andhra Pradesh details a suit for eviction and damages for restoring a shop to its original condition, with the lower court ruling against damages but still decreeing the suit. K. Srinivasa Rao VS N. Ramachandramurthy - Andhra Pradesh also involves a claim for damages linked to eviction and repairs, with the plaintiff seeking compensation for expenses to restore the property. SANJIVA BHANDARY VS VASANTHA - Karnataka addresses acts of waste and damage by defendants on schedule properties, including issues of ownership and partition, indicating damage as a key concern. GAJANAN VS JAYAMMA - Karnataka highlights claims for damages or compensation for vacating properties, including promises of monetary damages for vacating schedule properties.
- Injunctions and Preservation of Property - Several cases involve temporary or permanent injunctions to prevent damage or interference with suit schedule properties, such as N. Anantha Reddy VS Anshu Kathuria - Supreme Court, Karri Vaikuntavalli Thayaramma VS Sukla Narasimha Murthy - Andhra Pradesh, and K. Surendra Kumar VS S. Yashodamma - Karnataka. These cases emphasize the courts' role in protecting property pending disposal or resolution of disputes.
- Valuation and Compensation for Damage - Some sources specify the amount of damages or compensation sought, such as Rs. 18,000/- in K. Srinivasa Rao VS N. Ramachandramurthy - Andhra Pradesh for restoring a shop, and Rs. 10,00,000/- promised in GAJANAN VS JAYAMMA - Karnataka for vacating a property.
- Legal Provisions and Court Orders - The sources reference relevant legal provisions like the Civil Procedure Code, Sections 106 and 151, and specific orders like Order 40 Rule 1, which govern interim relief and damage claims. Court orders often set conditions for vacating properties, as seen in K. Surendra Kumar VS S. Yashodamma - Karnataka and SRI NAGABHUSHANAM S/O A ASWATHNARAYANA SETTY vs S. VANAJA - Karnataka, including timeframes and monetary conditions.
Analysis and Conclusion:
Damage suits concerning schedule properties typically involve claims for damages, injunctions to prevent further harm, and court orders for restoration or vacating properties. Courts aim to balance the protection of property rights with equitable relief, often awarding damages or imposing conditions for vacating properties. The amount of damages varies based on the extent of damage or loss claimed, with courts scrutinizing the nature of interference, acts of waste, or destruction. Overall, damage suits are integral to property litigation, emphasizing preservation, monetary compensation, and adherence to legal procedures.
Search Results for "Damage Suit Schedule"
2013 0 Supreme(SC) 1095 • India - Supreme Court
R.M.LODHA, SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Rule 10 - Order 1 - Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 - Section 452 - Damage ... The plaintiff also prayed for perpetual injunction restraining the two defendants, their officers/officials/servants from interfering with the suit scheduled property and by directing them not to demolish or cause any damage to the suit schedule property. ... The applicant did not claim any right, title or interest in the suit schedul....
2003 0 Supreme(AP) 878 • India - Andhra Pradesh
B.SESHASAYANA REDDY
, There appears to be no pleading that defendants are going to cause damage to suit schedule lands - When there is no danger or imminent ... Civil Procedure Code,1908 - Section 151 - Order 40 Rule 1 - Suit schedule properties - Suit for partition ... in respect of item in plaint A schedule and items in plaint B schedule lands and tractor shown in item of plaint C schedule trial ... There appears to be no pleading that the defendants....
2011 0 Supreme(AP) 42 • India - Andhra Pradesh
B.CHANDRA KUMAR
and Damages - Plaintiff filed suit for eviction of defendant from suit schedule shop and also for damages - Specific case is that ... to suit schedule shop and that plaintiff should spend at least to get suit schedule shop to its original shape - Whether the lease ... schedule shop, As far as damages are concerned, lower Court held against plaintiff, but however, suit was decreed....
2010 0 Supreme(AP) 1368 • India - Andhra Pradesh
B.CHANDRA KUMAR
Act – Section 106 – Plaintiff filed the suit for eviction of the defendant from the suit schedule shop and also for damages – His ... to the suit schedule shop and that the plaintiff should spend at least Rs. 18,000/- to get the suit schedule shop to its original ... specific case is that himself and the defendant entered into a lease agreement on 01.01.1998 agreeing to lease out the suit schedule ... It was also s....
2003 0 Supreme(AP) 555 • India - Andhra Pradesh
P.S.NARAYANA
schedule land pending disposal of suit - Counsel also submitted that subject matter of suit is an agricultural land and because ... of granting temporary injunction appellants are unable to proceed with agricultural operations and they are not causing any damage ... injunction restraining defendants from meddling with land by reducing its usage and utility by making pits and other excavations in suit ... the subject matter of the suit, the court is definitely empowered to grant tempora....
1990 0 Supreme(Kar) 470 • India - Karnataka
M.P.CHANDRAKANTARAJ, M.RAMAKRISHNA RAO
schedule C properties, acts of waste and damage by the defendants, and the validity of the Will dated 28-5-1956. ... Issues: The issues included the entitlement of the plaintiffs to the suit schedule B and C properties, the income of the suit ... The court also held that the B schedule properties are liable for partition between the parties and that the judgment and decree ... (8) What is the income of the suit schedule C properties? (9) Whether the....
2013 0 Supreme(Kar) 1417 • India - Karnataka
ASHOK B.HINCHIGERI
- Time to vacate suit premises was granted subject to fulfillment of said condition. ... Appeal against order of eviction - Appellant seeking more time to vacate as he was eking his livelihood by doing his business in suit ... premises - Settlement between parties on condition that appellant would pay monthly rent of Rs. 22,000/- until he vacates suit premises ... ... (v) The amount paid by way of security deposit by the appellant to the respondent shall be refunded by the respondent to the appellant at the time of the appellant's vacati....
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 20601 • India - High Court of Madras
Honourable Mrs Justice N. MALA
The trial court dismissed the suit, but the lower appellate court reversed this decision. ... Fact of the Case: A suit was filed for recovery of vacant possession against the defendants. ... The suit was filed by the 1st respondent for recovery of vacant possession of suit 'B' schedule property and on failure to grant permanent injunction restraining the defendants from altering or causing damage to the suit 'B' schedule property. ... 'B' #HL_START....
2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 727 • India - High Court of Karnataka
H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD, J
These appeals challenge the judgment and decree dated 17.06.2019 in O.S.Nos.6785/2008 and 566/2009, where one suit was decreed for ... The appellant, conceding that the respondent is the owner, has agreed and the respondent herein has also agreed that the appellant shall vacate and hand over possession without any damage of the suit schedule property in O.S.No.6785/2008 to the respondent within three months from today and the respondent ... has also agreed to give the appellant three months time to vacate the s....
2007 0 Supreme(Kar) 510 • India - Karnataka
SUBHASH B.ADI
He also submitted that, one Siddanna had promised that, he would give Rs. 10,00,000/- and also damage for vacating the suit schedule property and he is none other than the husband of decree holder. Parties made available their records for court's perusal. ... Holder promised the obstructer that he would give Rs. 10,00,000/- and the damage incurred by the obstructer and only then, the obstructer can hand over vacant possession. ... This court in view of the provisions of Section 70 (2) (c) of the Rent Act, 1999 held that,....
Filter by Legal Phrase
