This second appeal filed under Section 100 of the CPC was dismissed before admission. The High Court observed that the appellant failed to establish a substantial question of law or show the lower courts' findings to be perverse.
The Second Appeal is dismissed before admission, and miscellaneous applications are closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[32s8 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
SECOND APPEAL NO: 169 OF 2017
Second Appeal under section 100 of CPC ., against the Judgment and Decree dated 30.1 0.2013 passed in A.S.No.25 of 2013 on the file of the Court of the ll Additional District Judge, Karimnagar at Jagtial, preferred against the Judgment and Decree dated 09.10.2012 passed in O.S.No.59 of 2013 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Jagtial.
Between:
Kodipelli Narsaiah, S/o Rajaiah, Occ - Agriculture, RQ Kalleda Village, Jagitial l\rlandal, Karimnagar Dist.
...AppellanUAppellanUPlaintiff No.3
AND
Gangam fi/alla Reddy, S/o Ram Reddy, Occ - Agriculture, R/o Kalleda Village, Jagitial ttilandal, Karimnagar District.
...RespondenURespondenURespondent.
Counsel for the Appellant:SRl. BETHI VENKATESWARLU
_CounselfortheRespondent:SRI M RAMGOPALRAO
The Court made the following: JUDGMENT:
q
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU
S.A.NO.169 ot 2Ol7
]UDGMENT :
Being aggrieved by the ludgment and Decree in AS.No.25 of 2013 dated 30-10-2013 by which his appeal against the judgment and decree in OS.No.59 of 2003 was dismissed, the appellant who is plaintiff No.3 in the above referred original suit, filed this Second Appeal under Section 100 of C.P.C.
! ^ No 1a! ri Ml
.a:al
suit. Theappeal preferred by the appella nt- plaintiff No 3 was dismissedon merits'
5' In theresult, the Second Appealis dismissedbefore
Ad m ission.
Consequently,Miscellaneousapplications if any' are closed No costs.
---Y K. SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTR i/TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
To,
L
HIGH COURT
SSRN,J
DATED:10/08/2023
JUDGMENT
SA.No.169 oI 2017
,iE S T.q rA
t-l
k
1? 0[I 21ts
' 1.1'
<br>
SECOND APPEAL IS DISMISSED BEFORE ADMISSION
ri
a\ro\zg
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a substantial question of law is involved to admit the second appeal.
Whether the appellate courts erred in dismissing the appeal against the judgment on merits.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kodipelli Narsaiah
Gangam Reddy
Sambasivarao Naidu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
