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

1991 Supreme(SC) 163

K.RAMASWAMY, N.M.KASLIWAL
Gurmukh Singh – Appellant
Versus
Amar Singh – Respondent


Advocates:
AMAN VACHHER, ARVIND VERMA, Dhruv Mehta, I.B.Gaur, J.M.Khanna, ROMESH CHANDER, S.K.MEHTA

JUDGMENT

K. RAMASWAMY, J.— The unsuccessful defendant/appellant resisted the suit of the respondent for specific performance of the agreement of sale of 27 bighas and 2 biswas of the land situated in ChakkarKarman Village. According to the respondent he and the appellant contracted that the appellant would participate on their behalf in a public auction to purchase the evacuee property. He contributed his share. The appellant agreed to convey half the property purchased at the auction. The appellant became the highest bidder for a sum of Rs 5000 and he contributed his share and the sale was confirmed on March 11, 1964 and a sale certificate was issued by the custodian of the evacuee property but the appellant had not performed his part of the contract. Accordingly he laid the suit for specific performance or refund of the amount advanced by him. The suit was resisted by the appellant denying the execution of the agreement and also pleaded that the contract is illegal and void being opposed to public policy. The relief of specific performance being discretionary cannot be granted in favour of the respondent. The trial court decreed the suit; on appeal and on further second appeal th










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