SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1971 Supreme(SC) 615

C.A.VAIDIALINGAM, K.K.MATHEW
G. F. Angadi – Appellant
Versus
Y. S. Hirannayya – Respondent


Judgment

MATHEW, J.:- These two appeals, by special leave, are from the common judgment passed by High court of Mysore on 16-6-1966 confirming the order of the District Court, Bangalore, allowing an application for execution of the compromise decree passed on 24-6-1959 in appeal from the decree in O.S. 85 of 1949-50 of that court.

2. The appellant was the defendant in the suit and the respondent the plaintiff. As matter in controversy between the parties in the appeal turns upon the construction of the compromise decree, it is necessary to set out its terms:

(i) The defendant agrees to receive from the plaintiff a lakh of rupees paid as consideration for the sale of the property No.44, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Bangalore, together with stamp charges of Rs.3,300/- (rupees three thousand and three hundred only) with interest at six per cent per annum of the above two sums from 10-3-1947 up-to-date together with Rs.7,000/- (rupees seven thousand only) deducted by the Corporation minus the rent received viz. Rs.22,500/- (rupees twenty two thousand and five hundred only) and give up all rights to the said property. The plaintiff will be entitled to the materials lying on the premises.

(ii) The p

































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top