Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Lakkoji Mohan Rao vs Lakkoji Viswanadham on 7 April, 2022

                           HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH


MAIN CASE NO:       S.A.No.166 of 2022
                                PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.N      Date                           ORDER                              OFFICE
 o.                                                                          NOTE




       07.04.2022 BSB, J

                      Heard     the   learned      counsel    for    the
                  appellant/1st defendant.
                      The suit is filed for permanent injunction
                  and the same has been decreed inspite of the
                  contention of the appellant that irrespective of
                  the decree granted in the earlier suit for
                  partition, the parties are in possession of
                  different extents in view of the settlement by
                  the elders but without considering the same,
                  the trial Court decreed the suit and the first
                  appellate Court dismissed the appeal.             It is
                  further contended that in view of the dispute as
                  to the extent of the property, mere suit for
                  injunction is not maintainable and the plaintiff
                  ought to have filed suit for declaration of title
                  as well.     In this regard, among several other
                  substantial questions of law mentioned by the
                  appellant, the following two main questions are
                  relevant for consideration.
                     1. The courts below erred in law by allowing
                        the suit and confirming the same inspite
                        of rightly contending that the law does
                        not insist on existence of title in favour of
                        the plaintiff in a suit of that nature
                        reference in title will be only to ensure
                        that    the   possession    claimed    by    the
                        plaintiff are not of an outright trespauser
                        or encroacher, but is a person having
                        semblance of right, any one who wants
       pronouncement upon the title in his
      favour must file a suit for declaration of
      title.
   2. The courts below ought to have seen that
      the plaintiff and defendants are none
      other than step brother, both parties
      enjoying   properties    as   joint   family
      properties, once defendant disputing the
      extent share of plaintiff, the plaintiff
      without seeking for declaration of title
      and seeking relief in a suit for permanent
      injunction is not maintainable under the
      law.


     In addition thereto, it is also necessary to
formulate question of law as to whether the
Courts below have properly appreciated the
evidence on record.
     As such, it is a fit case to admit the
appeal.
     ADMIT.
     Notice to respondents.

Post on 29.04.2022.

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 PNV