✦ High Court of India · 06 Feb 2025

The High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 06 Feb 2025

9. Smt. Shanta Bai. W/o. Late Kashi Prashad, Aged about 64 years. Occ.: House hold, Rio. H. No.19-5-10/03, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad.

10. Balkishan S/o. Late Kashi Prashad, aged about 35 years. Occ.: Business, R/o, H. No. l9-5-10/3, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad.

11. Ram Gopal S/o. Late Kashi Parshad, aged about 32 years, Ooc.: Bisiness, R/o. 1 9-5-'l 0/3, Bahdurpura, Hyderabad.

12. Vinod S/o. Late Kashi parshad, aged about 29 years. Occ.: Bisiness, R/o.19- 5-1 0/3, Bahdurpura, Hyderabad. l3.Pramod S/o. L'ate Kashi Parshad. aged about 26 years. Occ. Bisiness, R/o.19-5-10/3. Bahdurpura, Hyderabad.

14. Deepak, S/o. Late Kashi Parshad. aged about 24 years, Oco. Bisiness, R/o.'l 9-5-10/3. Bahdurpura. Hyderabad. Respondent Nos.1 and 9 to 14 bata paid Respondent Nos.2 to 8 are not necessary parties. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2004(CCCAMP-NO: 10956 OF 2004) Petition under section '151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased To ...RespondenUDefendants suspend the operation of Judgment and Decree dated 27.10.2003 in OS NO.217 of 1998 on the file of the Court of the XIV Additional Chief Judge-cum Fast Track Court, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2004(CCCAMP. NO: 11494 oF 2004) Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 R/w Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim injunction restraining the Respondent, No. i and Respondents I to 14 from alienating by creating 3rd party interest on the suit schedule property while altering the nature of suit schedule property by way of under taking any constructions. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2005 CCCAMP. NO: 648 OF 2005) Petition under Section -15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioners to get the relinquish Deed executed in their favour from the respondent No-2 pending disposal of the Main Appeal- l.A. NO: 4OF 2014iCCCAMP. NO: 410 OF 2014) Petition under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 R/w Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant ad interim injunction against the respondents, restraining them, their agents, servants, nominees or any other persons claiming through or action under them from creating any third party interest and not to make any construction over the properties, not to change the nature of the suit schedule properties fully described in the accompanying affidavit, either by way of sale, lease mortgage, or any other manner whatsoever, pending disposal of the above Appeal in the interest of Justice. Counsel for the Appellant : Sri Karri Murali Krishna Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 : Sri Ramakrishna K Counsel for the Respondent Nos.10 to 14: Sri Damodar Mundra Counsel for the Respondent No.15 : M/s. G V S Mehar Kumar The Court delivered the following: Judgment I I HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA C.C.C.A.No.127 of2004 JUpgMgfST- (Per l fttn'ble -f i .lairne 'lbhinand Ktnar 'lhat'ili) \7hen the rrvrtter is taken uP for hearing, leamed counsel appearing for the appellants had informed this Court that the dispute between the panies has been seftled by way of compromise and hence, no funher orden need to be passed in this appeal. In view of the said submission, the Appeal is closed with an observation that the dispute between the parties has been settled. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, 1I any, pending shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/-K.SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR l..-: '5="r,o* A 'J' OFFICER To, 1 The XIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad(Fast Track Court ) Z. One C'C to Sri Karri Murali Krishna, Advocate [OPUC] 5. On" CC to Sri Ramakrishna K, Advocate IOPU9]- +. On" CC to Sri G V S Mehar Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] S. One CC to Sri Damodar Mundra, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two 6O CoOies Q fi HIGH COURT DATED:0610212025 ) JUDGMENT CCCA.No.127 of 2004 1HE Sr4, c,L^ o o 2 B npl znzl (( I J CLOSING THE CCCA WITHOUT COSTS ?p- t2 h 2)

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments