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

2013 Supreme(SC) 461

RANJAN GOGOI, P.SATHASIVAM
SATYA JAIN (D) – Appellant
Versus
ANIS AHMED RUSHDIE (D) – Respondent


ORDER

RANJAN GOGOI, J.

1. Civil Appeal No. 8653 of 2012 and other connected appeals were allowed by this Court by judgment and order dated 3.12.2012. The decree passed by the Appellate Bench of the High Court of Delhi in RFA (OS) No. 11/1984 was set aside and the suit for specific performance filed by the plaintiffs 1 (since deceased), 2 and 3 was decreed in the following terms :-

“30....We are of the further view that the sale deed that will now have to be executed by the defendants in favour of the plaintiffs will be for the market price of the suit property as on the date of the present order. As No material, whatsoever is available to enable us to make a correct assessment of the market value of the suit property as on date we request the learned trial judge of the High Court of Delhi to undertake the said exercise with such expedition as may be possible in the prevailing facts and circumstances.

31. All the appeals shall accordingly stand allowed in terms of our above conclusions and directions.”

2. I.A. Nos. 3-5, 12-13, 14-15 and D.No. 37212 of 2013 have been filed seeking impleadment/clarification/modification/ correction of the judgment dated 3.12.2012, in the circumstances n








































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