Constitution of India — Judgments

Recent judgments citing this act

1. Kasturi Yellamma vs The State of Telangana & Anr. on 13 September, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana13 Sept 2023

   Case Name: Kasturi Yellamma vs The State of Telangana & Anr. on 13 September, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 13 September, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice N. Tukaramji Subject: Criminal Revision, Release of Vehicle, Section 482 Cr.P.C. Key Legal Propositions 1. Revisional jurisdiction is inappropriate when a petition is returned for non-compliance with procedural requirements. 2. A court’s return of a petition due to deficiencies does not constitute an illegality warranting revisional intervention. 3. A petitioner can re-present a properly drafted application after addressing the deficiencies identified by the court. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Revision Case challenges the order dated 11.07.2023 returning a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking the release of a vehicle (Bolero Max pickup van bearing No. TS-02 UD 3482) pending trial. The petition was returned due to deficiencies, including a lack of proof of ownership and failure to comply with other requirements. Held: A. On Issue of Maintainability of Revision: Majority View: The Court held that the revisional jurisdiction was not appropriate in this case,

2. National Insurance Company Limited vs. K. Laxmamma on 19 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana19 Jun 2023

   Case Name: National Insurance Company Limited vs. K. Laxmamma on 19 June, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 19 June, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Key Legal Propositions 1. In cases where a vehicle is hired by the A.P.S.R.T.C. and insured by an Insurance Company, the Insurance Company is solely liable for compensation. 2. The principles of joint and several liability do not apply when an insurance policy covers a hired vehicle, and the insurer is primarily responsible. 3. The Apex Court precedents in *Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation vs. Rajenderi Devi* and *Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation vs. Kulsum* govern the liability of insurance companies in hired vehicle accidents. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal arises from a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) award dated 13.06.2007, in O.D.No. 1701 of 2005. The MACT had held the Insurance Company and the A.P.S.R.T.C. jointly and severally liable for compensation in a fatal accident case. The Insurance Company challenged this award, arguing that the A.P.S.R.T.C. alone should be liable as it had hired the vehi

3. M.Sathaiah vs Shaik Chand Pasha & Anr on 21 July, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana21 Jul 2023

   Case Name: M.Sathaiah vs Shaik Chand Pasha & Anr on 21 July, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 21 July, 2023 Bench: Smt Justice M.G.Priyaoarsini Subject: Workmen’s Compensation Act – Enhancement of Compensation – Determination of Wages and Disability – Interest on Compensation Key Legal Propositions 1. The Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (now amended as Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923) aims to provide social justice and compensation to workmen injured during employment. 2. While determining compensation, the actual wages earned by the employee, supported by evidence, should be considered over the minimum wage fixed by the statutory authority. 3. Interest on the compensation amount is payable from the date of the accident, not merely from the date of default in payment. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises from a claim under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, concerning injuries sustained by the appellant/claimant, a labourer, during the course of his employment. The Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation awarded a certain amount of compensation, which the appellant sought to enhance.

4. G Sai Krishnaa Krishnaaiah Gaddam & Another vs. Inampudi George & Others on 22 February, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana22 Feb 2023

   Case Name: G Sai Krishnaa Krishnaaiah Gaddam & Another vs. Inampudi George & Others on 22 February, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 22 February, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu Subject: Civil Revision Petition – Impleadment of Parties – Order I Rule 10 CPC – Section 151 CPC – Article 227 Constitution of India Key Legal Propositions 1. A court can implead a person as a party to a suit only if they are a proper and necessary party, and whose presence is essential for effective adjudication. 2. Seeking to implead parties solely on the basis of their lack of cooperation or for allowing requests of existing defendants is insufficient grounds for impleadment. 3. A trial court’s decision dismissing an application for impleadment, after proper appreciation of facts, is generally not subject to interference under Article 227 of the Constitution. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Revision Petition arises from the dismissal of an application (I.A.No.14 of 2021) by the Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Sathupally, seeking to implead respondents 6 to 11 as defendants in O.S.No.10 of 2016. The petitioners/plaintiffs argued that

5. S. Naveen vs. Naveena Yedlapalli on 17 March, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana17 Mar 2023

   Case Name: S. Naveen vs. Naveena Yedlapalli on 17 March, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 17 March, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu Subject: Family Law – Interim Maintenance – Hindu Marriage Act – Setting aside of order and remand – Opportunity of hearing. Key Legal Propositions 1. A trial court’s failure to consider a validly filed counter and provide an opportunity of hearing to a party constitutes a procedural irregularity warranting intervention by the High Court. 2. Remand is an appropriate remedy when a trial court fails to consider crucial evidence or arguments, leading to a potentially unjust outcome. 3. Courts should consider extenuating circumstances, such as pandemic-related restrictions, when assessing a party’s ability to participate in proceedings. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Revision Petition arises from an order dated 17 February 2022, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad, in I.A. No. 932 of 2021, in O.P. No. 365 of 2021. The Family Court directed the petitioner-husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month and legal expenses of Rs. 10,000/- to the responden

6. Syed Abdul Aleem & Anr. vs. Sri Abdul Qayyum & Ors. on 05 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana5 Jun 2023

   Case Name: Syed Abdul Aleem & Anr. vs. Sri Abdul Qayyum & Ors. on 05 June, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 05 June, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu Subject: Civil Revision Petition – Amendment of Plaint – Order 6 Rule 17 CPC – Article 227 of Constitution of India Key Legal Propositions 1. Amendment of plaint can be liberally allowed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, provided it does not cause prejudice to the opposing party or alter the cause of action. 2. A proposed amendment that introduces new facts and changes the nature of the suit, beyond mere elaboration of existing averments, is not permissible. 3. Failure to explain the necessity for amendment at an earlier stage and introducing entirely new claims warrants rejection of the amendment application. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Revision Petition challenges the order of the District Judge, Nizamabad, rejecting a request to amend the plaint in a suit concerning a land agreement. The petitioners/plaintiffs sought to substitute paragraphs 1-9 of their plaint with a revised version, alleging new facts and circumstances. Held: A. On Amendment of Plaint (Order 6

7. Medical Council Of India vs M/s. Church Of South India Trust Association on 12 December, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana12 Dec 2023

   Case Name: Medical Council Of India vs M/s. Church Of South India Trust Association on 12 December, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 12 December, 2023 Bench: The Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti Subject: Refund of interest accrued on a bank guarantee invoked by the Medical Council of India. Key Legal Propositions 1. A statutory authority like the Medical Council of India, when holding funds received through a bank guarantee, acts in a fiduciary capacity akin to a trustee and is liable to account for accrued interest. 2. The principle of constructive res judicata applies when a party fails to raise a claim in an earlier proceeding, precluding them from asserting it in a subsequent writ petition. 3. A writ petition seeking recovery of a monetary claim is maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution, particularly when the act of withholding funds is deemed unjust and arbitrary. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal arises from a writ petition concerning the refund of interest earned on a bank guarantee of Rs. 7,00,00,000/- provided by the respondent (Christian Medical College and Hospital) to the app

8. M.A.C.M.A.Nos.8 of 2017 and 1592 of 2018 on 10 February, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana10 Feb 2023

   Case Name: M.A.C.M.A.Nos.8 of 2017 and 1592 of 2018 Court: Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, Asifabad / High Court Date of Judgment: 10 February, 2023 Bench: Justice M.G. Priyadarsini Subject: Motor Vehicle Accident – Quantum of Compensation Key Legal Propositions 1. Determination of compensation in motor accident claims requires consideration of medical expenses, loss of income, nature of injuries, and disability. 2. The rate of interest on awarded compensation is subject to prevailing judicial pronouncements and may be adjusted accordingly. 3. Insurance companies are liable for compensation in cases of accidents involving insured vehicles, even if the driver lacked a valid license, provided the policy covers the risk. Judgment Summary Background: These appeals arise from a claim petition (O.P.No.236 of 2015) filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Asifabad, seeking compensation for injuries sustained by the appellant in a motor vehicle accident on 23.02.2014. The accident involved a jeep and an auto trolley. The Tribunal awarded Rs.85,000/- as compensation, which was challenged by both the claimant (appellant in M.A.C.M.A.No.8 o

9. Sardar Avatar Singh vs Mohammed Abdul Rasheed on 12 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana12 Jun 2023

   Case Name: Sardar Avatar Singh vs Mohammed Abdul Rasheed on 12 June, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 12 June, 2023 Bench: Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Civil Revision Petition – Withdrawal of Petition Key Legal Propositions 1. A petitioner may seek permission from the court to withdraw a civil revision petition. 2. Upon such request and grant of permission, the court may dismiss the petition as withdrawn. 3. No costs are awarded when a petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Judgment Summary Background: The Civil Revision Petition was filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India against an order dated 24.02.2023. The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition. Held: A. On Petition Withdrawal: Majority View: The Court granted permission to the petitioner to withdraw the Civil Revision Petition. Dissenting View: None. Decision: The Civil Revision Petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs. Any pending miscellaneous applications were also closed. --- Additional Required Fields Case Title: Sardar Avatar Singh vs Mohammed Abdul Rasheed on 12 June, 2023 Keywords: civil revision petition,

10. K. Srinivasa Rao vs D.A. Deepa on 01 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana1 Mar 2023

    Case Name: K. Srinivasa Rao vs D.A. Deepa on 01 March, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 01 March, 2023 Bench: Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha & Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarsini Subject: Divorce, Cruelty, Desertion, Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage Key Legal Propositions 1. False accusations and filing of multiple legal cases can constitute mental cruelty justifying divorce. 2. Prolonged separation (over 10 years in this case) can indicate an irretrievable breakdown of marriage and support a decree of divorce. 3. While irretrievable breakdown isn’t a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, it is a weighty circumstance courts can consider when deciding on severance of marital ties. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant filed an appeal challenging the Family Court’s dismissal of his divorce petition based on grounds of cruelty and desertion. He alleged that the respondent filed false cases against him and his family, and that their marriage had irretrievably broken down. The respondent filed a counter admitting the marital tie and the legal proceedings initiated against the appellant but sought dismissal of the petition. Held: A. On C

11. Sri Sai Ram Projects Limited & Another vs Sri Boyenepally Sri Jayavardhan & Others on 25 April, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana25 Apr 2023

    Case Name: Sri Sai Ram Projects Limited & Another vs Sri Boyenepally Sri Jayavardhan & Others on 25 April, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 25 April, 2023 Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, C.J. and N. Tukaramji, J. Subject: Real Estate Law, Writ Appeal, RERA, Development Agreements, Specific Relief Key Legal Propositions 1. Transfer and posting of officers, specifically the appointment of the Chairman of RERA, may be contrary to the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 if not in accordance with established procedures. 2. RERA Authorities should consider pending applications within a reasonable timeframe, as directed by courts, and in accordance with the provisions of the RERA Act, 2016 and its Rules. 3. Courts may impose restrictions on transactions related to a property subject to dispute, pending resolution by RERA, while allowing construction and finalization to proceed. Judgment Summary Background: These Writ Appeals arise from orders passed in Writ Petitions concerning a real estate development project. Writ Petition No. 2694 of 2021 challenged the delegation of quasi-judicial functions by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA).

12. Chelluri Laxmaiah vs IAO:1 OF 0231, Kyapa SarveshwarRao and Ors on 25 July, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana25 Jul 2023

    Case Name: Chelluri Laxmaiah vs IAO:1 OF 0231, Kyapa SarveshwarRao and Ors on 25 July, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 25 July, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice N. Tukaramji Subject: Civil Revision Petition – Injunction – Lack of Reasoned Order – Principles of Natural Justice Key Legal Propositions 1. A judicial order must satisfy the principle of non-arbitrariness and be a reasoned or speaking order, explaining the basis for the decision. 2. Even in the absence of a statutory provision requiring recording of reasons, an adjudicating authority must explain its understanding and rationale in reaching conclusions. 3. Failure to provide reasons in an order renders it unjustifiable and violates the principles of natural justice. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Revision Petition challenges an interim injunction order dated 10.03.2023 passed by the Agency Divisional Officer/Revenue Divisional Officer, Mulugu, in O.S No.E/27107/2022. The petitioner alleges that the suit was improperly valued and framed as a suit for permanent injunction when it was actually a claim for declaration of title. The petitioner further contends that the inju

13. Smt. Pathioulla Sarada vs Union Bank of India on 02 February, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana2 Feb 2023

    Case Name: Smt. Pathioulla Sarada vs Union Bank of India on 02 February, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 02 February, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili & Sri Justice Pulla Karthik Subject: Labour Law, Minimum Wages, Writ Appeal, Writ Petition Key Legal Propositions 1. An authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 can direct payment of minimum wages and compensation. 2. A High Court can suspend an order passed by such an authority. 3. Willingness to pay the difference in wages can be a ground for disposing of writ appeals and petitions. Judgment Summary Background: These writ appeals and petitions arise from an order dated 17.01.2022 passed by the Regional Labour Commissioner & Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, directing payment of minimum wages and compensation to the appellants. The impugned order was challenged before the Single Judge, who suspended it. The present appeals and petitions seek to set aside the suspension and enforce the Authority’s order. Held: A. On Issue of Suspension of Authority’s Order: Majority View: The Court disposed of the writ appeals and petitions directing the respondents t

14. Koppula Sujatha & Ors. vs. B. Srinivas on 29 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana29 Mar 2023

    Case Name: Koppula Sujatha & Ors. vs. B. Srinivas on 29 March, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 29 March, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu Subject: Civil Revision Petition, Lok Adalat Settlement Key Legal Propositions 1. A Civil Revision Petition becomes infructuous upon settlement of the original suit before a Lok Adalat. 2. Courts may dismiss petitions as infructuous when the subject matter no longer survives. 3. Pending miscellaneous applications are closed upon dismissal of the main petition. Judgment Summary Background: The petitions (C.R.P. Nos. 755 & 779 of 2021) were filed under Section 115 of CPC and Article 227 of the Constitution of India against an order dated 06/09/2019 in O.S. No. 76 of 2012, pending before the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Nirmal. The petitions sought a stay of further proceedings and suspension of the impugned order. Held: A. On Issue of Maintainability of Revision Petitions: Majority View: The Court noted that the learned counsel for the petitioners informed the Court that the main suit (O.S.No.76 of 2012) had been settled before a Lok Adalat. Consequently, the petitions became infructuous. Diss

15. Hafez Syed Azeemuddin vs The State of Telangana on 21 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana21 Mar 2023

    Case Name: Hafez Syed Azeemuddin vs The State of Telangana on 21 March, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 21 March, 2023 Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, C.J. and N. Tukaramji, J. Subject: Criminal Procedure Code, Section 91/102 – Bank Account Freezing – Legality – Investigation – Scope of Power Key Legal Propositions 1. Section 102 CrPC allows seizure of property suspected to be stolen or found under circumstances creating suspicion of an offence, requiring fulfillment of pre-conditions for lawful exercise of power. 2. Attachment or debit freezing of a bank account is a drastic measure affecting valuable rights, necessitating strict adherence to legal procedures and fulfillment of pre-conditions under Section 102 CrPC. 3. A mere transaction into or out of a bank account is insufficient to justify freezing it under Section 102 CrPC; a specific allegation or suspicion of stolen property or involvement in an offence must exist. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal arose from a writ petition challenging an order dismissing the petitioner’s challenge to a notice issued by the police to a bank, directing it to freeze the petitioner’s accoun

16. Union of India vs Y. Vijaya on 18 April, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana18 Apr 2023

    Case Name: Union of India vs Y. Vijaya on 18 April, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 18 April, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili and Sri Justice Pulla Karthik Subject: Writ Appeal – Rejection of candidature for Constable post due to past criminal case – Consideration of Acquittal – Principles of Natural Justice. Key Legal Propositions 1. An employer must consider the specific circumstances when assessing information regarding a candidate’s criminal history, particularly the nature of the offense and the outcome of the case. 2. A mere rejection of candidature without assigning reasons is unsustainable and requires re-examination in light of established legal principles and guidelines. 3. While a clean acquittal is preferable, an acquittal based on benefit of doubt should also be considered by the employer, along with other relevant factors, before rejecting a candidate. Judgment Summary Background: The Writ Appeal arises from a challenge to a Single Judge’s order setting aside the rejection of a candidate (Respondent) for a Constable post in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF). The Respondent was prov

17. Q. Lilomaqa vs P. Vivekananda Reddy & Ors on 27 February, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana27 Feb 2023

    Case Name: Q. Lilomaqa vs P. Vivekananda Reddy & Ors on 27 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 27 February, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice A. Santhosh Reddy Subject: Civil Revision Petition – Condonation of Delay – Setting Aside Ex Parte Decree – Limitation Act – Order IX Rule 13 CPC Key Legal Propositions 1. Courts possess the discretion to condone delays in applications seeking to set aside ex parte decrees, and this discretion should be exercised liberally, focusing on substantial justice rather than strict adherence to procedural technicalities. 2. The acceptability of the explanation for delay is the sole criterion for condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, and the length of the delay is not determinative. 3. A court should adopt a pragmatic approach when considering applications for condonation of delay, particularly when the applicant is a bona fide purchaser and refusal to condone the delay would result in deprivation of property rights. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Revision Petition challenges an order dismissing an application seeking to condone a 235-day delay in filing an application to set aside an ex parte

18. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation vs C.T. Bhanu Pratap Singh on 20 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Mar 2023

    Case Name: Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation vs C.T. Bhanu Pratap Singh on 20 March, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 March, 2023 Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, N. Tukaramji Subject: Writ Appeal – Building Permission – Shortfall Notice – Consideration of Application Key Legal Propositions 1. A statutory authority’s decision to issue a shortfall notice can be subject to judicial review, particularly when inconsistencies are alleged in its application to similarly situated individuals. 2. Courts may remit matters back to the concerned authority for fresh consideration when the decision-making process appears flawed or incomplete. 3. A statement made by counsel before the court regarding reconsideration of a matter can be binding, necessitating a fresh examination of the issue. Judgment Summary Background: The Writ Appeal arises from an order passed by a Single Judge allowing a Writ Petition filed by the Respondents (petitioners before the Single Judge) challenging a shortfall notice issued by the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) regarding a building application. The GHMC issued the shortfall notice citing insufficient

19. M/s. Lakshmi Finance vs. Commissioner of Income Tax & Another on 11 August, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana11 Aug 2023

    Case Name: M/s. Lakshmi Finance vs. Commissioner of Income Tax & Another on 11 August, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 11 August, 2023 Bench: P. Sam Koshy & Laxmi Narayana Alishetty, JJ. Subject: Income Tax – Revision of Assessment – Lease Equalization Charges – Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – Writ Petition Key Legal Propositions 1. Lease equalization charges can be allowed as expenses if accounted for as per Guidance Notes issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), aligning with the real income calculation method. 2. An intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 can be subject to revision under Section 264 of the Act, particularly when errors exist or legitimate claims were not considered. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax, while exercising revisional powers under Section 264, must consider all relevant material and cannot dismiss a legitimate claim on mere technicalities. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner challenged an order dated 29.03.2004 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad, and sought a direction to treat the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Ac

20. Anumula Bhasker & Anr. vs. Dr. K. Lavanya & Ors. on 20 June, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Jun 2023

    Case Name: Anumula Bhasker & Anr. vs. Dr. K. Lavanya & Ors. on 20 June, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 June, 2023 Bench: Justice Lalitha Kanneganti Subject: Civil Revision Petition – Limitation for Cancellation of Registered Documents – Application of Supreme Court Guidelines regarding COVID-19 period. Key Legal Propositions 1. The period of limitation for filing suits and applications was extended by the Supreme Court due to the COVID-19 pandemic, providing a 90-day period from 01.03.2022, or a longer period if the remaining limitation exceeded 90 days. 2. The computation of limitation must consider the extended period as per the Supreme Court’s guidelines, even if the original limitation period expired during the pandemic. 3. A suit filed within the extended period of limitation, as determined by applying the Supreme Court’s guidelines, is not barred by limitation. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Revision Petition arises from the dismissal of an application seeking rejection of a plaint in a suit concerning the ownership of a property and the cancellation of registered sale deeds. The petitioners, defendants in the suit, argued

Search all 40,765 judgments →