THUMU VENKATA NARAYANA vs KURUMOJU NARASIMHA CHARY — C.A. No. 4740/2021

Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010102842014

Filing Date

27-Mar-2014

Registration No

C.A. No. 4740/2021

Diary Number

10284/2014

Order Date

11-Aug-2021

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Last updated 20-Mar-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THUMU VENKATA NARAYANA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KURUMOJU NARASIMHA CHARY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Aug-2021

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 28-Oct-2016

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 28-Oct-2016

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 04-Dec-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 04-Dec-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 03-Nov-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 03-Nov-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 24-Aug-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 24-Aug-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 02-Jul-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 02-Jul-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 01-Apr-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 01-Apr-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 24-Mar-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 03-Feb-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 03-Feb-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 01-Dec-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  19. 01-Dec-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  20. 19-Sep-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  21. 19-Sep-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  22. 04-Aug-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  23. 21-Apr-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  24. 15-Apr-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  25. 27-Mar-2014

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 4740/2021

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: C.A. No. 004740/2021 The Supreme Court set aside the Andhra Pradesh High Court's order from 20.01.2014 that had allowed the second appeal by interfering with the First Appellate Court's factual findings without framing proper substantial questions of law. The Court found the High Court examined evidence as a court of first appeal improperly, with questions that were factual rather than legal in nature. The appeal was restored to the High Court with directions allowing plaintiffs to reformulate legal questions for reconsideration, with the Court hoping for early disposition of the long-pending 2006 appeal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case