ARUL NAYAGAM Vs. Y SUBBA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in these appeals is the common order in O.A.Nos.1197 and 1198 of 2008 and A.No.5792 of 2009 in C.S.No.1042 of 2008 dated 07.07.2011 granting temporary injunction restraining the Appellants 1 and 2 from in any way dealing with or alienating by way of sale, lease or mortgage, any part of the suit property pending disposal of the suit and appointing the 1st Respondent-Subba Rao as Receiver to manage the entire suit property and to collect the rental income periodically and file report once in three months and dismissing the application for rejection of plaint C.S.No.1042 of 2008. Arguments in all three Original Side Appeals were heard together and all three Original Side Appeals shall stand disposed of by this common Judgment.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated case of Respondents/Plaintiffs is as follows:-

(3.) RESISTING O.A.Nos.1197 and 1198 of 2008, 1st Appellant has filed counter stating that 3rd Respondent has failed to obtain clearance from the Income Tax Department which is a mandatory obligation on his part in the compromise decree. According to Appellants, 1st Appellant had obtained planning permit and also obtained building plan from CMDA and application for building permit was approved by the Corporation. It was further averred that as per the decision of the Supreme Court, the construction made prior to 28.02.1999 is entitled for regularisation as one time measure. Appellants alleged that Respondents 1 and 3 are to comply with the terms of the compromise to get their allotted share and without doing so, Respondents 1 and 3 have filed the vexatious suit.