Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1524 AP
Judgement Date : 28 March, 2022
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
MAIN CASE NO: S.A.No.138 of 2022
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.N Date ORDER OFFICE
o. NOTE
28.03.2022 BSB, J
Heard learned counsel for the appellants.
The suit is filed for permanent injunction and
the suit was decreed. Having aggrieved by the
same, the defendants preferred the appeal and the
same was dismissed. Having aggrieved by the same,
the appellants/defendants preferred the second
appeal before this Court on the following substantial
questions of law.
a) Whether the Judgments and Decrees passed by the
Courts below are sustainable when the finding arrived
by the Courts below are perverse without there being
any evidence?
b) Whether the court below is right in not considering that
the admitted facts which need not be proved as the
evidence of PWs.1 to 3, clearly establish that in
consistence evidence and no corroboration?
c) Whether the Court below is right in not properly
framing the point for consideration as required under
Order 41 Rule 31 of C.P.C. and also not considering all
the contentions raised by the appellant in the appeal as
per the judgment of this Hon ble Court in GORRELLA
DURGA VARA PRASADA RAO v. INDUKURI RAM RAJU
(D.B.) 2002 (2) ALT 589; and in PITHAPURAM
MUNICIPALITY v. CHRISTIAN MEDICAL CENTRE,
PITHAPURAM - 2005 (3) ALD 813.
d) Whether the courts below are right in ignoring vital
piece of evidence of Ex.B-4 & B-5, which establishes the
claim of the Appellants, which constitutes a substantial
question of law as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in 2000 (1) SCC 434?
e) Whether the courts below are right in decreeing the
suit against the well considered principle that Plaintiffs
cannot succeed on the weakness of defendant's,
Plaintiff must establish his own case on his strength as
held in the case of K. Venkata Subba Reddy vs. Bairagi
Ramaiah (died) and his LRs 1999 (3) ALT 210 and
Jagdish Prasad Patel (dead) through Lrs., and another
vs. Shivnath and others reported in 2019 (6) 82.
f) Whether the Judgments and Decrees passed by the
Court below is right suit for injunction without filing the
suit for declaration of right and title over the suit
property when there are rival claims as held by the
Apex Court in Anathula Sudhakar vs. P. Buchi Reddy
(dad) by Lrs and others ?
In such view of the matter, it is a fit case to
admit the appeal.
ADMIT.
Ms. Mahalakshmi, learned counsel appearing
for the respondents and having filed caveat, is
present and reported material papers in the appeal were received.
Post on 13.04.2022.
_________________ B.S.BHANUMATHI,J
I.A.No.1 of 2022
This petition is filed to grant stay the operative portion of judgment and decree dated 27.08.2019 in O.S.No.174 of 2012 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor, pending disposal of the second appeal.
The learned counsel for the respondents sought time to file counter.
Post on 13.04.2022.
_________________ B.S.BHANUMATHI,J
PNV
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!