Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
P.Subbaraulu Reddy vs G.Chengini Reddy on 28 April, 2022
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
MAIN CASE NO: S.A.No.195 of 2022
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.N Date ORDER OFFICE
o. NOTE
28.04.2022 BSB, J
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.
The original suit is filed for
a) declaring right and title to the plaint
schedule properties in favour of plaintiffs.
b) directing defendant No.2 to deliver
possession of the plaint schedule properties to
the plaintiffs and in case of failure to do so to
deliver the same through the process of court.
c) cancelling the sale deed dated 03.02.2005
executed by defendant No.1 in favour of
defendant No.2 for the plaint schedule
properties as invalid and void abinitio.
and the suit was decreed against which appeal is
preferred but the same was dismissed. Having
aggrieved by the same, the second defendant
filed this appeal on the following substantial
questions of law, amongst others.
b) Whether the First Appellate Court being
Final Court of Facts
exercised its power
properly in evaluating the Facts,
Depositions and Exhibits, passed Reasoned
Order on facts and Issue(s) as per the
Judgement of Apex Court in (2017) 15 SCC
309?
c) Whether the suit in O.S. No.943 of 2005 is
maintainable without seeking declaration
that the Ex.A1 invalid or nonest or illegal or
that it is not binding on the
Respondents/Plaintiffs?
e) Whether the Plaintiffs discharged their
burden of proving their right, title on their
own strength but not on the weakness of
the case of the Appellant?
i) Whether the Hon'ble Courts below justified
in declaring the Ex.A1 Registered Sale Deed
executed in favour of Appellant without
framing issue and point for determination
wherein there is no separate Court fee
under Section 37 of AP Court Fee and Suit
Valuation Act is paid empowering the Court
give a declaratory finding.
k) Whether the Suit in O.S. No.943 of 2005 on
the file of 1st Additional Junior Civil Judge,
Triupati is barred under Section 14 of the
A.P Inams (Abolition & Conversion into
Ryotwari) Act, 1956?
o) Whether the Decree and Judgment of
Courts below are sustainable?
In view thereof, it is a fit case to admit
the appeal.
ADMIT.
Notice to respondents.
Post on 30.06.2022.
Learned counsel for the appellant is
permitted to take out personal service of notice
to the respondents through RPAD and file proof
thereof.
_________________
B.S.BHANUMATHI,J
I.A.No.1 of 2022
This petition is filed to suspend the
operation of decree and judgment dated
30.06.2015 in O.S.No.943 of 2015 on the file of
the court of I Additional Junior Civil Judge,
Tirupati which is confirmed in decree and
judgment of the IV Additional District Judge,
Tirupati in A.S.No.93 of 2015 dated 09.12.2021.
Notice to respondents.
Post on 30.06.2022.
Learned counsel for the appellant is
permitted to take out personal service of notice
to the respondents through RPAD and file proof
thereof.
Till then, status quo to be maintained.
_________________
B.S.BHANUMATHI,J
PNV
