Disposed

Amina Ameer v. B.Balamani

Telangana HC25 Apr 2023SA/322/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a second appeal regarding a property dispute, the High Court of Telangana disposed of the appeal in terms of a Joint Memorandum of Compromise filed by the parties under Order XXI Rule 3 and Section 151 of the CPC. The court recorded the agreement to sell the suit schedule property jointly.

What did the court decide?

Decree passed in terms of the Joint Memorandum of Compromise; appellants and respondents to jointly sell the suit schedule property and withdraw all cases.

Amina Ameer Vs B.Balamani — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁶⁰ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA : AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.SANTHOSH REDDY

¶6

;

¶7

SECOND APPEAL NO: 322 OF 2014

¶8

Appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908, against the Judgment and Decree dated 03.02.2014 made in A.S.No.'139 of 2013 on the file of the Court of the ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad preferred against the Judgment and decree dated.05.03.2013 made in O.S.No.3545 of 2010, on the file of the Court of the XIX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court,, Hyderabad.

¶9

Between:

¶10

1 . Ms.Amina Ameer, D/o. Mohd. Ameerullah Khan, Aged. 28 Years, Occ:Engineer,

¶11

2 Ms. Khateeja Ameer, D/o. Mohd. Ameerullah Khan, Age.21 Years, Student, Both are Rl/o. H.No.2-2-25l5 Durgabhai Deshmukh Colony, Bagh Amberpet lVderqOqO -^{500013and Rep. by theirGPA Holder SyedYahai, S/o. Syed} Jeelani, 58 years, R/o. No.2-2-2515, DD Colony, Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabdd.

¶12

...Appellands/Defendants 5 & 6/Resondents 5 & 6.

¶13

AND

¶14

Smt. B. Balamani, Wo. Late B. Raghupathi Housewife, Aged.sg Years, H.No. 1 -9-2781521 4l A Near T emple, Adikmet, Hyderabad.

¶15

Smt.S.Rani,.D/o. Late B. Raghupathi, Housewife H.No.1-9-278l52l4lA Near Temple, Adikmet, Hyderabad.

¶16

B.Raju, S/o. Late B. Raghupathi, Aged.39 Years, Business H.No. 2-3-438, Amberpet Hyderabad.

¶17

B.Laxmi Narayan, S/o. Late B. Raghupathi, Aged.36 Years, Business H.No. 1 -9-27 81 521 4l A Near Temple, Adikmet, Hyderabad.

¶18

Smt. B.Laxmi Devi, Dio. Late B.Raghupathi Wo. B.Shekar, Age.33 Years, Housewife H.N.'l-27, Post Bandlaguda Rajender Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. (Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 are.represented by their G.P.A.Holders, Respondents 6 to 11)

¶19

Adabala Srikar, S/o.f AlMohan Rao, Aged.29 Years, Occ: Business Plot No. 83, Shivapuri Colony AlS.Rao. Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶20

i:a } u Ef

¶21

V.Nageswara Rao, S/o. Late V.V.Rao, Aged.46 Years, Occ: Business H.No.33-150 Kotta Veedhi, Narsipatnam Visakhapatnam

¶22

Valugula Komaraiah Goud, S/o. V.Veeraiah Goud.(Died per LR-R-16)

¶23

Cahrgagonda Sadanandam, S/o. Somaiah, Aged. 39 Years, Occ: Business H.No.2-7-465 Waddepallu Hanamkonda, Warangal District.

¶24

l0.Battulaa Prasad Reddy, S/o. Subba Reddy, Aged. 40 Years, Occ. Business H.No.29-1 441 2/235 Neredmet, Ma lkaigiri, Ranga Reddy District.

¶25

Nallagangu Ranga Reddy, S/o. N.Venkat Reddy, Occ: Business H.No.8-268411l7 Flat No.301 Sri Surya Residency Banjara Hills Road No.^12, Hyderabad. Respondents/Plaintiffs/Appellants.

¶26

tMohd. lmran Khan, S/o. Mohd. Ameerullah Khan, Aged.2B^years,

¶27

'13. tVohd. Amjad Khan, S/o. Mohd. Ameerullah Khan, Occ: Doctor,

¶28

'14. Mohd. Ameerullah Khan, S/o. Mohd. Fakrullah Khan.

¶29

Sharifa Atiya, W/o. [Vlohd. Ameerullah Khan, Occ: Housewife

¶30

Valugula Vadaprakashi S/o. Late Valugula Komuraiah Goud, Aged.50 Years, Occ: Govt Teacher, R|/o. H.No.5-1 1-19611, Pochamakuntta, Hanuman^Nagar, Hanmakonda, Telangana State.

¶31

(Respondents 12lo 15 are not necessary parties)

¶32

...Respondents/Defendants 1 to 4/Respondents¹ to^4.

¶33

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014^(SAMP. NO: 894 0F 20141

¶34

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court^may be^pleasedto suspend the Operation of the Judgment and decree dated 31212014ⁱⁿ AS.No.139i2013, on the file of the ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

¶35

Counsel for the Appellants: Sri. P KAMLAKAR

¶36

Counsel for the Respondents 6, 7,9 10 11 & 16: Sri. C SRI HARI PRASAD

¶37

The Court made the following: JUDGMENT:

A5R,J SA No.322 2014

\ \

I I

THE HONOURABLE SRI^{JUSTICEA.SANIHOSHREDDY}

¶42

SECON D^{APPEAL No.322OF 2014}

¶43

JUDGMENT:

¶44

Appellonts ond^{respondent Nos'l to 5 who ore being} represenled by respondent^{Nos.6, 7, 8 (died) representedby} respondenl No.T6,9,^{lO ond llore present. Leorned} counsel ior both^porties ore^{presenl ond they ore identified} by their respective^counsel.

¶45

2 During the pendency of^{the secondoppeol,it is stoted} thot both porties hove entered^{into o compromise ond} seltled the. dispuie omicobly^{outsidethe Court os per the} ierrns of the^joirrt rnemorondum^{of conrpronrise. In this} regord, bc.rth^porfies hove^filed ioint^{nremorondumof} compromise uncler Order^{XXlll,Rule 3 reqd rn'ith Section 151} of ihe Code of Civil Procedure,^{1908 vide USR No'3880/,}

¶46

Colecr I 7.04.2023. The^{terms of conlpromisereods os under}

¶47

l. Thot the Appellonts ond^{Respondents sholl} with<lrcw oll the coses filed^{ogoinst eoch} olher.

¶48

ASR J SA No.322 201,1

¶49

¶50

Thol the Aopellonts ond Respondeni Nos.6,Z,9,lO,i I ond l6 f.""" lr"lVl"]. the suit scheduie property ond rf,ol.-tf.,J sole considerolion with muiuo-l underslondings

¶51

The concern Vendees of Appellonts ond Respondenl Nos.6,2,9,lO,l I ond l5 ;, ;.; successors, ossignees or ogenls hove joinily sole the suit schedule property

¶52

either io third porties or con retoin the

¶53

property.

¶54

The oppellonts ond the Respondenl Nos.6,Z,9,lO,l I cnd l6 sholl h""i;.;;li their respeciive orrginol Oocuments to ttrebefore execulion respeclive purchosers of sole or deed.to their "rrignu.i

¶55

Compromise ts recorded 1o ihe extenl of conciition Nos.l ond 2 mentioned in the obove porogroph

¶56

4 ln view of the obove, ihe second oppeol is disposed of in terms of compromise There sholl be no order os to costs

¶57

Miscelloneous opplicoiions, if ony pending, shqll slond

To,

closed.

K. SRINIVASA^RAO JOINT REGISTRAR sEcrloN #r,"=*

¶67

//TRUE^COPY//

¶68

The ll Additional^{Chief Judge, City Civil Court' Hyderabad (With Records)} The XIX Junior^{CivilJudge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (WithRecords)}

¶69

One CC to SRl.^{P KAMLAKAR Advocate} [OPUC]

¶70

One CC to SRl.^{C SRI HARI PRASAD Advocate} IOPUCI

Two CD CoPies.

HIGH COURT

ASRJ

DATED:2510412023

JUDGMENT

SA.No.322 of 2014

!-.i li'ir. i-ii.i ia' i
"..:<br>[6 JlJil 2M I

¶79

DISPOSING OF THE Second Appeal in terms of Compromise.

¶80

¶81

¶82

IN THE^{HIGH COURT OF ]UDICATUREFORTHE STATEOFTELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶83

s.A. NO. 322^{oF 2014}

¶84

Between :

¶85

1.Ms.AminaAmeer, D/o.^{Mohd. AmeerullahKhan.} Aged33 years, Occ: Engineer, Rfo. H.No.2-2-2515, Durgabhai^{DeshmukhColony,} Bagh AmberPet,HYderabad-5000¹³ Presently residingin^U.S.A. 2.l'4s.Khateeja^{Ameer,D/o.Mohd.AmeerullahKhan,} Aged28years,Occ:Student, Rfo.H.No.2-2-2515,^{Durgabhai DeshmukhColony,} BaghAmberpet,Hyderabad-500013 Presently residinginU.S.A. Both are represented^{bytheirGPAHolder} Mr.SyedYahia,S/o.^{SyedJeelani, Aged65years,} R/o.H.No. 2-2'2515,^{Durgabhai DeshmukhColony,} BaghAmberpet,Hyderabad-500013	....APPELLANTS
AND
1.Smt.B.Balamani,Wo.^{LateB.Ragupathi,} Aged:66 Years,Occ:^Housewife, R/o.H.No.l'9-278152141A,^NearTemple, Adikmet,Hyderabad. 2.Smt.S. Rani,D/o. Late^{B. Ragupathi,} Aged:49 Years,Occ:^Housewife, R/o.H.No.l-9-27\l52l4lA,^NearTemple, Adikmet,Hyderabad. 3.B.Raju, S/o.Late^B.RaguPathi, Aged:46 Years,Occ:^Business, R/o.H.No.t-9-279l52l4lA,^NearTemple, Adikmet,Hyderabad. f'{ L \|:a^{Ur\c>*L'Lu'-o.).$'}
to.Y /r-,^L-*7 ttb-il]--	,(". lt'

4.B.LaxmtNarayana,S/0.Late B. Ragupathi, Aged:43 Years,Occ:Business, R/o.H.No. t-9-278/5Zl4lA,NearTempte, Adikmet,Hyderabad.
5.Smt.B.LaxmiDevi,D/o.Late B. Ragupathi, W/o.B.Sekhar,Aged:40Years,Oci:Housewife, R/o.H.No.1-27, Post Bandlaguda, Rajenderanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
RespondentsNo.3to7arerepresented bytheir GPAHolders whoareRespondenLsNo.6to11herein)
5.AdabalaSrikar, S/o.A. MohanRao, Aged36 Years, Occ:Business, R/o.PlotNo.B3.Shivapuri Colony, A.S-RaoNagar, Hyderabad.
7.V.NageswaraRao,S/o.Late V.V.Rao, Aged53Years,Occ:Business, R/o.H.No. 33-150,Kotta Veedhi, Narsipatnam,Visakhapatnam,Andhra^pradesh
8.ValugulaKomaraiah Goud,S/o.Late V. Veeraiah Goud, Aged 76 Years,Occ:Retired HeadMaster,V,l/W2 R/o.H.No.5-11-l196/1,Pochammakunta,^' Hanmakonda, Warangal District. Dln-P^{(lge W-t---} pi,a1-+-tt-Ct^^/4) ,
9.Chargagonda Sadanandam,S/o.Somaiah, Aged46 Years,Occ:Business, R/o.H.No. 2-7-465,Waddepally, Hanmakonda, V/arangal.
10.BattulaaPrasadReddy, S/o.SubbaReddy, Aged47 Years,Occ:Busniess, R/o.H.No.29-14421235, Neredmet, Malkajgiri,RangaReddy District.
11 NallaganguRanga Reddy.S/o.N.VenkatReddy, Aged61 Years,Occ:Busniess, R/o.H.No.8-2-684/117,Flat No. 301, SriSuryaRc:-sideDp',iBanjaraHiIls,Hyderabad. ^iW- "'"
^^{a</sup> l- h)'.. Lh*q I JFli(.^D}
()r it
,n-t.^/2.-,--g---'Y r{b-1,1

¶90

¶91

Mohd.^{ImranKhan,S/o. Mohd. Ameeru} ah^Khan, Aged 35 Years, Occ: Business. R/o.H.No.2-2-255l5, Durgabhai^{Deshmukh Colony,} Bagh Amberpet, HYderabad-500013

¶92

Mohd. Amjad Khan, Sio.^{Mohd. Ameerullah Khan.} Aged 32 Years, Occ: Doctor, R/o.H.No.2-2-255l5, Durgabhai^{Deshmukh Colony.} Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad-500013

¶93

Mohd. Ameerullah Khan, S/o.^Mohd. Fakrullah^Khan, Aged 59 Years, Occ: Business, R/o. H. No.2-2-255l5, Durgabhai^{Deshmukh Colony,} Bagh Amberpet, Hyderabad-500013.

¶94

Mrs. Sharifa Atiya, Wo. Mohd. Ameerullah^Khan, Aged 52 Years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. H. No.2-2-255l5, Durgabhai^{Deshmukh Colony,} t"/"r- (W3n Yw,-T"*1

¶95

IL (R ts ry'parties to this petition, as the suit against them is dismissed and^{as theywere} shown as co-nominee^parties in Second^Appeal)

¶96

RESPONDENTS

¶97

JOINT MEMORANDUM oF coMPROMISE FILED UNDE R ORDER 23, RULE-3, R/W.SECTION 151^{()F C.P.C}

¶98

It is submitted that the^present appeal S.A. No.322 of 2Ol4^{is filed} by^the appellants challenging the impugned Judgment^{and Decree.dated 03lO2l2Ol4} passed in A.S.No.139/2013 by the Hon'ble II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Coutt, Hyderabad. -This Hon'ble Court^granted status-quo orders^{dated 24.04.2OL4in} SAMP.894/2014 in SA. 32212O74 till disposal of main^case.

¶99

7t is submitted that' the Respondents herein are the Plaintiffs and^the

¶100

Appell are the Defendants to the Original Suit No.3545/2010.^The ('"-<-.) J -n^{. lozi1-fl-r'} I Se il^/'/'* EH/ nr. IL u-l\rL_ /) //.e/'f

¶101

¶102

¶103

Respondents herein being Plainhffs have filed o.s. No.3545/2010 on the Rle oF the Hon'ble XIX Junior civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad against the appellants herein and the Hon'ble court Dismissed the original suit, vide Judgement dated 05.03.2013. The Plaintiffs have fited an appeal A.s. No.139/2013 challengingthesaid dismissal judgement before the Hon'ble II Additional chief Judge, city civil courls. Hyderabad and the said appeal was allowed infavour of the plaintiffs, vide ludgement dated 03.02.2014. Aggrieved with the said Judgment. the appellants herein have filed the present S.A.No.322120L4 and this Hon'ble Court granted status-quo orders dated 24.04.2014 in SAMP.894/2014 in SA. 3Z2|ZOL4 till disposal of main case.

¶104

It is submitted that during pending the present appeal, due to interference of

¶105

well wishers, both the parties have setued the present dispute amicably and entered into this compromise with the following terms & conditions :

¶106

That the Appellants and Respondents shall withdraw all the cases filed against each other. 6,'l,1,lo'^{ll q} l4

¶107

That the Appellants and Respondent No.Gt herein have jointly sale the suit schedule property and share the sali consideration with mutual understandings.

¶108

{

¶109

rhe concern Vendees of Appelanrs and r^,c^,L#r1Jr"1n^t* or their successors, assignees or agents have jointly sale the suit schedule property either to third parties or can retain the property. q lL 5. The Appellants Appellants and the Respondent the Respondent No'.t*#herein [) [) 'q ']n'tt ']n'tt shall handover all

¶110

The Appellants Appellants and the Respondent the Respondent No'.t*#herein [) [) 'q ']n'tt ']n'tt shall handover all
)---<--,(
their respective original documents to the respective-pwchasem or to their
assignees be[ort: ecution of saic decd
6'r 3 Y' P<-r2*-*-"
WV ,r-"
,/
L I \l
I
b

¶111

¶112

It is therefore^prayed that^this Hontle Court^{may be pleased to decreethe}

¶113

( appeal in^terms of the^comPromise

¶114

h
(Syed' Yahia)
GPA Holder of Ms. Amina Ameer &
o tl -01 -'14 y+ Ms.Khateeja Ameer
Date: 4ffi2
$.'9
Place : Hyderabad ( Adabala Srikar) L
? V Pofl@) P-,,o
Counsel for the Appellants Nageswara Rao) -
,t
{cl ..ti
Counse for en '.F Goud) Zi',..:
siY
(Chargagonda Sadanandam) "
Fr'"'
(Battulaa Prasad Reddy) ., ,1-
N /-'7#(
(Nallagangu Ranga Reddy) r. "-i

¶115

vn L uq uLA.v 1D/r lA^KNft

¶116

¶117

¶118

IN THE^{HIGHCOURT OF]UDICATURE} FOR^{THESTATE OF TEI.ANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶119

s.A. NO. 322 0F 2014

¶120

]OINT ME MORAN^{DUM OF} COMPROMISE FIL D UND o ER 23 ULE-3 R/W .SECTIo^{N 151 0F C.P.C.}

¶121

D7 'au'2n^7-7 FILED ON^: -*t'-2frzV r

¶122

FILED BY^: 2-t

¶123

COUNSEL FOR^{THEAPPELLANTS}

¶124

COUNSEL FOR THE^RESPONDENTS

¶125

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA:AT HYOERABAD}

¶126

TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH^{DAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY THREE}

¶127

PRESENT

¶128

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE A.SANTHOSH REDDY}

¶129

SECO ND APPEA NO: 322 OF 2014

¶130

Between:

¶131

Ms.Amina Ameer, D/o.^{Mohd.AmeerullahKhan,Aged. 28 Years, Occ:Engineer,}

¶132

Ms. Khateeja Ameer,^{D/o. Mohd. Ameerullah Khan,Age.21 Years, Student,} Both are Fi/o. H.No.2-2-25l5^{Durgabhai DeshmukhColony, BaghAmberpet} Hyderabad - 500013^{and Rep. by their GPA Holder Syed Yahai,S/o Syed} Jeelani, 58^years, Fl/o.^{No.2-2-25l5,DD Colony,BaghAmberpet, Hyderabad'}

¶133

...Appellants/Defendants^{5 & 6/Resondents5 & 6'}

¶134

AND

¶135

Smt. B. Balamani,^{Wo. Late B. Raghupathi Housewife' Aged 59 Years,H No'1-} 9-278t52141A Near Temple,^{Adikmet, Hyderabad.}

¶136

Smt.S.Rani, D/o. Late^{B. Ra$hupathi,Housewife H.No'1-9-278/52l4lA Near} Temple, Adikmet, HYderabad.

¶137

B.Raju, S/o. Late ti.^{Raghupathi, Aged.39Years,BusinessH'No' 2-3-438'} Amberpet Hyderabad.

¶138

B.Laxmi Naiayan, S/o.^{Late B. Raghupathi,Aged.36 Years, Business H'No1-9-} 278t5214tA Near Temple,^{Adikmet,Hyderabad.}

¶139

Smt. B.Laxmi Devi,^{D/o. Late B.RaghupathiWio' B.Shekar,Age'33 Years,} Housewife H.N.1-27,^{Post Bandlaguda Rajender Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy} District.

¶140

(Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 are^{represented by theirG.P.A.Holders, Respondents6 to ll)}

¶141

O. AOabata Srikar, S/o.^{A.Mohan Rao, Aged.29 Years, Occ: BusinessPlot No. 83,} Shivapuri Colony^{A.S.Rao' Nagar, Hyderabad.}

¶142

V.Nageswara Rio,^{S/o. Late V.V.Rao, Aged.46 Years, Occ: Business H No'33-} 150 Kotta Veedhi, Narsipatnam^{Visakhapatnam}

¶143

Valugula Komaraiah^{Goud, S/o. V.VeeraiahGoud.(Died per LR'R'I6)}

¶144

Cahrgagonda Sadanandam,^{S/o. Somaiah,Aged.39 Years, Occ: Business} H.No.2-7-465 Waddepallu^{Hanamkonda, Warangal District'}

¶145

lO.Battulaa Prasad Reddy,^{Sio. Subba Reddy, Aged' 40 Years, Occ: Business} H.No.29-1 4412t235 Neredmet,^{Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District'}

¶146

Nallagangu Ranga Reddy,^{S/o. N.Venkat Reddy, Occ: Business H No'B-2-} 6841117 Flat No. 301^{Sri Surya Residency BanlaraHillsRoad No' 12,} Hyderabad.

¶147

... Respondenls/Plaintiffs/Appellants.

¶148

12.Mohd. lmran Khan, S/o.^{Mohd.Ameerullah Khan, Aged.28 years'}

¶149

Mohd. Amjad Khan, S/o.^{Mohd' Ameerullah Khan, Occ: Doctor,}

¶150

14.Mohd. Ameerullah^{Khan, S/o. Mohd. Fakrullah Khan'}

¶151

Sharifa Atiya, Wo.^{Mohdi.Ameerullah Khan, Occ: Housewife}

¶152

r F E I

¶153

l6.Valugula Vadaprakash, S/o. Late Valugula Komuraiah Goud, Aged.50 years, Occ: Govt Teacher, R/o. H.No.5-1^j-j96t1, pochamakuntta, Hanuman Nagar, Hanmakonda, Telangana State.

¶154

(Respondents 12 to 15 are not necessary parties)

¶155

...Respondents/Defendants 1 to 4/Respondents 1 to 4.

¶156

Appeal under Section 1 00 of the Civil^procedure Code 1908, against the Judgment and Decree dated 03.02.2014 made in A.S.No..139 o,f 2013 on the file of the court of the ll Additional chief Judge, city civil court, Hyderabad preferred against the Judgment and decree dated.05.03.20'13 made in O.S.No.3545 of 2010, on the file of the Court of the XIX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court,, Hyderabad.

¶157

Joint Memorandum of compromise SR No. 38807 of 2023 filed under order 23 Rule 3 Fl/w Section^'151 of the CPC, praying that the High Court may be pleased to pass a decree in terms of the Memorandum of compromise filed therewith as between the petitioners/appellants and respondents/respondents in the said SA.No. 322 of 2014 on the file of the High Court.

¶158

The appeal coming this day for orders as to set ement in the presence of Sri P. Kamalakar, Advocate for the appellants and of sri. c sri Hari prasad, Advocate Respondents 6, 7, I 10 11 & 16: Appellants and respondents through their respective advocates having filed in Joint Memorandum of compromise SR No. 38807/2023 daled 15.04.2023, requesting the court to pass a decree in terms the memorandum of compromise entered into between them and upon perusing the grounds appeal, judgment and decree of the Lower court and the memo of compromise purporting to have been signed by the parties and their Advocates and filed with said Second Appeal and it appearing from the said memorandum of compromise that the parties herein have entered into compromise and setfled the matter out of court in terms memorandum of compromise filed herein.

¶159

This court Doth Record the terms of the said memorandum of compromise in original whereof is filed in the said Joint fVlemorandum of compromise sR No. 3gg07 of 2023 of and a copy whereof is annexed hereto and DorH in terms of the said memorandum of compromise declare order and Decree in SA. No-322 of 2014 as follows:

¶160

That the Second Appeal be and hereby is disposed of in terms of compromise.

¶161

That the Appellants and Respondents shall withdraw all the cases filed against each other.

¶162

That the Appellants and Respondent Nos. 6,7,9,10,1^.l and 16 have joinfly sale the suit schedule property and share the sale consideration with mutual understandings

¶163

The concern vendees of Appelants and Respondent Nos. 6,7,g,10,11 and 16 or their successors, assignees or agents have'joinfly sale the suii schecrule property either to third parties or can retain the property.

¶164

The appellants and the Respondent Nos.6,7,9,10,11 and 16 shall handover all their respective original documents to the respective purchases or to their assignees before execution of sale deed.

¶165

That there shall be no order as to costs in Second Appeal-

¶166

K. SRINIVASA AO
JOINT REGI
//TRUE COPYII
SECTION FFICER
To,
1
The ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad
2 The XIX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
3 Two CD Copies.
Jgk a5

¶167

HIGH COURT DATEOi25l0412023

¶168

DECREE

¶169

SA.No.322 ol 2014

¶170

Disposing of the Second Appeal in terms of Compromise

¶171

Amina Ameer v. B.Balamani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amina Ameer v. B.Balamani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kommu Srinivasa Rao Vs K. Rajaiah, And 14 Others

Syed Meraz Ahmed, Hyderabad and 2 Others Vs Ch. v Ratnam, E.Godavari Dist and 8 Others

Nimma Venkatram Reddy Vs Balije Sunki Nagender

Katukuri Ramakrishna Reddy Vs Katkuri Laxma Reddy

Vuppala Sarada, W/O v.Bharat Vs Smt. Pothuraju Vijaya, W/O Satya Sai Suresh

P Jayanth Kumar and 2 Others Vs Thoomukuntla Laxminarayana and Another