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

1989 Supreme(SC) 606

T.K.THOMMEN, L.M.SHARMA
Ramzan – Appellant
Versus
Hussaini – Respondent


Advocates:
ARUNESHVAR GUPTA, B.L.KACHHAVAN, Badri Das Sharma, S.Kumar, V.M.TARKUNDE

JUDGMENT

SHARMA, J.:- Special leave is granted.

2. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the respondent against her brother, the appellant, for specific performance of an alleged contract of sale dated 23-6-1965 in respect of a house. The property was under a mortgage and according to the plaintiff, case, the defendant had agreed to execute a deed of sale on the redemption of the mortgage by her, which she did in 1970. In spite of her repeated demands the defendant failed to respect the agreement which necessitated the institution of the suit.

3. The defendant-appellant, besides pleading limitation, denied the agreement as also the plaintiffs allegation that she had redeemed the mortgage.

4. The question of limitation was taken up by the trial Court as a preliminary issue and decided in favour of the plaintiff. The order has been confirmed by the High Court by the impugned judgment.

5. The plaintiff served a notice in July 1984 demanding specific performance before filing the suit. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that since the alleged agreement is said to have been executed in June 1965, the suit is barred by limitation, and alternatively, even counting the period











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