REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Ayalasomayajula Bhavani Sankara Shastry Appellant

V/S

Ayalasomayajula Lakshmi Narasamma Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

NAGUBAI AMMAL VS. B SNAMA RAO [REFERRED TO]
H VENKATACHALA IYENGAR VS. B N THIMMAJAMMA [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT SINGH VS. BHAGIRATHI [REFERRED TO]
NEELAVATHI VS. N NATARAJAN [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAN KAUR VS. KARTAR KAUR [REFERRED TO]
ANNASAHEB BAPUSAHEB PATIL VILAS G DALVI NATHAL GHARAGE RAJARAM K POWAR PANDURANG B SARNOBAT VS. BALWANT ALIAS BALASAHEB BABUSAHEB PATIL AND HEIRS:RAMACHANDRA Y DALVI:RAJARAM A GHARAGE:DINKARRAO K POWAR:K L SARNOBAT [REFERRED TO]
UTTAM SINGH DUGAL AND COMPANY LIMITED VS. UNION BANK OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
JANKI NARAYAN BHOIR VS. NARAYAN NANDEO KADAM [REFERRED TO]
D S LAKSHMAIAH VS. L BALASUBRAMANIYAM [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH KUMAR AGGARWAL VS. K K MODI [REFERRED TO]
APPASAHEB PEERAPPA CHANDGADE VS. DEVENDRA PEERAPPA CHANDGADE [REFERRED TO]
ANDHRA BANK VS. ABN AMRO BANK N V [REFERRED TO]
CHANDER KANTA BANSAL VS. RAJINDER SINGH ANAND [REFERRED TO]
YUMNAM ONGBI TAMPHA VS. YUMNAM JOYKUMAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
HIMANI ALLOYS LTD VS. TATA STEEL LTD [REFERRED TO]
J SAMUEL VS. GATTU MAHESH [REFERRED TO]
KASINADHUNI KUMARESWARA RAO VS. KAIVARAM RAJYALAKSHMAMMA AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAT SHARAN VS. PURUSHOTTAM [REFERRED TO]
SHIVAKUMAR VS. SHARANABASAPPA [REFERRED TO]
MEENA PRADHAN VS. KAMLA PRADHAN [REFERRED TO]
BASAVARAJ VS. INDIRA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sunil H. Ganu, Senior Advocate, assisted by and for M. Chalapathi Rao, learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner and Sri V. R. N. Prashanth, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) This Appeal under Sec. 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'CPC') has been filed by the appellant/plaintiff in O. S. No. 94 of 2010 in the Court of X Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam District at Anakapalle, challenging the dismissal of the said suit, vide judgment and decree dtd. 22/11/2017.

(3.) O. S. No. 94 of 2010 was filed by Ayalasomayajula Bhavani Sankara Shastry for partition of immovable properties in the plaint schedule, Item Nos. I to IV into 5 equal shares; for partition of Item Nos. V and VI into 5 equal shares; and for partition of Item No. VII into 70 equal shares and to allot 11 such shares to the plaintiff; and also to partition of Item No. VIII into 10 equal shares, and to allot one such share to the plaintiff and to put him/deliver the same to him by converting the joint possession into separate possession, as also for future profits and costs of the suit.

Click here to view full judgment.

AYALASOMAYAJULA BHAVANI SANKARA SHASTRY Vs. AYALASOMAYAJULA LAKSHMI NARASAMMA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address