Partly allowed

S.R.K.K.R.S.B. Raj Bahadur v. Chintala Venkat Ram Reddy

Telangana HC19 Sept 2014CRP/3174/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision, the High Court modified a lower court's order to replace the appointed surveyor with the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records for a disputed land measurement. The remaining order was confirmed.

What did the court decide?

The lower court's order was modified to appoint the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records to assist the Advocate-Commissioner; the rest of the order was confirmed.

S.R.K.K.R.S.B. Raj Bahadur Vs Chintala Venkat Ram Reddy — Telangana HC (2014) — LawSathi Research

¶1

The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy

¶2

Civil Revision Petition No.3174 of 2014

¶3

Dated 19.09.2014

¶4

Between:

¶5

SRKKRSB.Raj Bahadur

¶6

…Petitioner And

¶7

Chintala Venkat Ram Reddy and 3 others

¶8

…Respondents

¶9

Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.B.Venkat Rama Rao Counsel for respondent No.1: Mr.P.Giri Krishna

¶10

The Court made the following:

¶11

Order:

¶12

This Civil Revision Petition arises out of Order, dated 21.07.2014, in IA.No.1934 of 2014 in OS.No.515 of 2011, on the file of the Court of the learned Special Sessions Judge for trial of Cases under SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶13

I have heard Mr.B.Venkat Rama Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.P.Giri Krishna, learned Counsel for respondent No.1.

¶14

The only issue that has got deduced after hearing the learned Counsel for both the parties is that whether the lower Court is right in appointing an Advocate-Commissioner to measure Survey No.70 with the assistance of Mandal Surveyor and two private surveyors.

¶15

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in OS.No.933 of 2001, filed by deceased respondent No.2 for perpetual injunction against the petitioner and two others, an AdvocateCommissioner was appointed for survey and demarcation with the help of a surveyor from the office of the Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records, Ranga Reddy District and that if the lower Court has felt the necessity of further survey and demarcation of the land, it ought to have nominated the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records to assist the Advocate-Commissioner.

¶16

The learned Counsel for respondent No.1 stated that he has no objection for replacing the surveyor appointed by the lower Court with the

¶17

Assistant Director, Survey and Land Records. Accordingly, the order under revision is modified only to the said extent. The rest of the order stands confirmed.

¶18

Subject to the above modification, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.

¶19

As a sequel, CRPMP.No.4355 of 2014, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.

¶20

______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J)

¶21

Dt: 19^th September, 2014 LUR

S.R.K.K.R.S.B. Raj Bahadur v. Chintala Venkat Ram Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.R.K.K.R.S.B. Raj Bahadur v. Chintala Venkat Ram Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V. Ramesh Babu Vs Marella Pulla Reddy

S.Satyanarayana Raju Vs Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation

Smt. Ravi Rama, Vs Chakali Satyamma

Sk. Fathima Bee Vs The General Manager

G.Shareefunnisa Begum Vs The Kurnool Municipal Corporation

N. Shiva Raj Madiga, Vs M. Durga Reddy