Muddala Venkata Satyanarayana vs Guddati Venkata Mahalakshmi
2024 Latest Caselaw 9221 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Muddala Venkata Satyanarayana vs Guddati Venkata Mahalakshmi on 4 October, 2024

Author: K Suresh Reddy

Bench: K Suresh Reddy

        HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AT AMARAVATI

   MAIN CASE No.: Second Appeal No.434 of 2024


                         PROCEEDING SHEET

SL.   DATE                               ORDER                            OFFICE
NO.                                                                        NOTE
3)  04.10.2024 KSR, J

                               SA No.434 of 2024
                     Defendants 1 to 3 in OS No.72 of 2015 on
               the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil
               Judge, Palakol, are the appellants in the present
               Second Appeal. The respondent herein filed the

above suit against the appellants herein for grant of permanent injunction. The suit was contested by the appellants and both sides adduced evidence in terms of their pleadings. After an elaborate trial, the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Palakol, decreed the suit, by judgment and decree dated 22.10.2018. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants herein filed an appeal in AS No.83 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the X Additional District Judge, Narsapur. After hearing both sides, the learned X Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal, by judgment and decree dated 29.01.2024. Questioning the same, the present Second Appeal is filed by the defendants.

In view of the following substantial questions of law raised at Ground Nos.30, 31 and 32 of the Grounds of Appeal, ADMIT.

SL.       DATE                          ORDER                           OFFICE
NO.                                                                      NOTE

"30. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Courts below are erred by misreading the documentary evidence more particularly Exs.A1 Settlement deed and Exs.B1, B3 to B5 revenue records and Ex.B2 maktha receipts?

31. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Courts below have failed to hold that the mother in law of the plaintiff who is the executants of Ex.A1 settlement deed had no title over the plaint schedule property, and as such the title over the plaint schedule property was not conveyed to the plaintiff under Ex.A1 settlement deed under Sections 5 and 7 of the Transfer of Property Act?

32. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, when the plaintiff as PW.1 in her evidence admitted that her father in law got the property in a partition deed of the year 1976 and agreed to produce the certified copy of partition deed to prove title of her mother in law, the courts below have given go bye to the provisions of Sections 101 and 114 of the Evidence Act and Sections 34, 37 and 38 of the Specific Relief Act?"

______ KSR, J Nsr

SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE

SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE

SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE

SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE