TALARI VENKATAIAH(DIED) AND OTHERS Vs. BOWRAMPREET PLOT OWNER WELFARE ASSOCIATION, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in this second appeal, under Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, ('the Code' for short) are the plaintiffs 1 to 9, 11, 12 and 13 in OS.No. 584 of 1999. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, by a common judgment, dated 28.08.2014, passed in OS.Nos.584 of 1999, 552 of 1999 and 201 of 1999, dismissed the suits, OS. nos.584 and 552 of 1999, but, decreed with costs OS.No. 201 of 1999 and granted a perpetual injunction in favour of the plaintiff therein, that is, S.M.A.C.H.S. Limited (Satish Mutually Aided Co-operative Housing Society Limited) represented by its President, I.S.N. Vinod Reddy.

(2.) At the stage of admission, I have heard the submissions of Sri A. Venkatesh, learned counsel for the appellants, and of Sri U. Muralidhar Rao, learned counsel on caveat for the respondents 2 to 4, on the limited aspect as to whether any substantial questions of law raised by the appellants or any other substantial questions of law are involved; And, if so, whether the second appeal deserves to be admitted or not. I have perused the material record.

(3.) Before proceeding further, it is apt to note that though in the grounds of appeal substantial questions 'a' to 'j' were raised, at the hearing, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that only the questions 'a', 'f', 'g' and 'i' are the substantial questions involved in this second appeal. The said questions verbatim read as under: