Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 6679 AP
Judgement Date : 2 August, 2024
APHC010116182024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3206]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 577/2024
Between:
Virupakshi Jayarami Reddy and Others ...PETITIONER(S)
AND
Palem Damodhar Reddy and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. P JAGADISH CHANDRA PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
The Court made the following order:
There is no representation for the respondents today also despite
service of notice.
Prima facie, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the suit
is not maintainable in as much as a suit for restriction on alienation is not
permissible and relies upon of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in case of Colonel Shrawan Kumar Jaipuriyar Vs. Krishna Nandan Singh
& Anr 1 and the Judgment of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad in the case of Peruri Manikyamba @ Main Vs. Agraharapu Veera
Venkata Satyanarayana Murthy & Anr2.
1
(2020) 16 SCC 594
2
2013 (5) ALD 629 (DB)
Post on 30.08.2024.
In the circumstances, there shall be stay of all further proceedings in
O.S.No.599 of 2019 on the file of the learned V Additional Junior Civil Judge,
Tirupati, pending further orders.
________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.
BSM
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!