Telangana High Court
CRP/3508/2016 of B. SUGUNAMMA Vs SHIRIDI SAI SEVA SAMITHI PUBLIC on 28 December 2017
B.SIVA SANKARA RAO Civil Revision Petition No.3508 of 2016 ORDER Heard both sides. There is nothing to interfere with the impugned order of the trial Court but for it will not prevent the petitioner if at all to file a detailed application for the oral contention in the course of hearing is
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Conclusion
ORDER
HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO
Civil Revision Petition No.3508 of 2016
Heard both sides.
There is nothing to interfere with the impugned order of the trial Court but for it will not prevent the petitioner if at all to file a detailed application for the oral contention in the course of hearing is not supported by any material facts in the affidavit petition before the lower Court for passing impugned order as in the plaint schedule property there are no such sheds which accommodate much less 100 cows and noting of the physical features and report by the Advocate Commissioner. Thereby if at all to mention those details, the petitioner to file fresh application to appoint Advocate-Commissioner to determine on own merits.
Accordingly and in the result, the revision is disposed of. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Civil Revision Petition shall stand closed.
Date:28.12.2017 vvr
_______________________
Dr. B. SIVA SANKARA RAO, J