Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.17 seconds)
London Mission Memorial Church Csi, vs Cheepuru Rama Rao, on 3 March, 2022 cites

Dhatla Lakshmipathi Raju vs P.Venkata Ramana And Another on 2 June, 2017

4. The trial Court took the view that there was an inordinate delay in filing the present application. The trial Court held that the petitioners, while taking steps for examining PW.1 afresh, did not take any steps to call either the attestors or to examine the son of the 1 st attestor at any point of time and had moved this application, 15 months after PW.1 had been examined in relation to the deed of settlement. The Trial Court relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ram Reati vs. Mange Ram (Died) through LRs and ors., Civil Appeal No.1684 of 2016; and the judgments of this Court in Batchu Jagadish Kumar vs. Mogili Venkataswamy (dided) and ors.,1; and Dhatla Lakshmipathi Raju vs. P. Venkata Ramana and Anr.,2, held that the unexplained delay in moving the application would non suit the petitioner and dismissed the application.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 4 - Cited by 3 - C V Reddy - Full Document

Batchu Jagadish Kumar vs Mogili Venkataswamy Died on 30 August, 2019

4. The trial Court took the view that there was an inordinate delay in filing the present application. The trial Court held that the petitioners, while taking steps for examining PW.1 afresh, did not take any steps to call either the attestors or to examine the son of the 1 st attestor at any point of time and had moved this application, 15 months after PW.1 had been examined in relation to the deed of settlement. The Trial Court relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ram Reati vs. Mange Ram (Died) through LRs and ors., Civil Appeal No.1684 of 2016; and the judgments of this Court in Batchu Jagadish Kumar vs. Mogili Venkataswamy (dided) and ors.,1; and Dhatla Lakshmipathi Raju vs. P. Venkata Ramana and Anr.,2, held that the unexplained delay in moving the application would non suit the petitioner and dismissed the application.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 3 - Cited by 4 - K V Lakshmi - Full Document

Ram Kumar Rajak vs Manglu Rajak (Died) Through Lrs. Smt. ... on 24 February, 2022

4. The trial Court took the view that there was an inordinate delay in filing the present application. The trial Court held that the petitioners, while taking steps for examining PW.1 afresh, did not take any steps to call either the attestors or to examine the son of the 1 st attestor at any point of time and had moved this application, 15 months after PW.1 had been examined in relation to the deed of settlement. The Trial Court relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ram Reati vs. Mange Ram (Died) through LRs and ors., Civil Appeal No.1684 of 2016; and the judgments of this Court in Batchu Jagadish Kumar vs. Mogili Venkataswamy (dided) and ors.,1; and Dhatla Lakshmipathi Raju vs. P. Venkata Ramana and Anr.,2, held that the unexplained delay in moving the application would non suit the petitioner and dismissed the application.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - R K Dubey - Full Document
1