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

2013 Supreme(SC) 625

H.L.DATTU, DIPAK MISRA
CHEBROL SRIRAMALU – Appellant
Versus
VAKALAPUDI SATYANARAYANA – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The Plaintiff/Respondent herein had filed a Suit for Specific Performance of the Agreement of Sale, dated 23.08.1997. The Trial Court by its order dated 20.07.2004 has decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the order of the Trial Court, the Defendant/ Appellant had preferred an appeal before the High Court. The High Court by the impugned judgment and order dated 22.07.2010 has dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved by the same, the Defendant/ Appellant is before us in this appeal, by Special Leave.

3. Heard Shri Basava Prabhu Patil, learned senior counsel for the Defendant/Appellant and Shri S.N. Bhat, Learned counsel for the Plaintiff/ Respondent.

4. Shri Patil, learned senior counsel takes us through the evidence deposed by P.W.1 wherein a specific question was put to the Defendant as to whether he was aware that the suit property is an ancestral property or not. In response to the said question, the Defendant/ appellant has stated that the property is a joint family property. In spite of those statements, the Trial Court has not thought it fit to frame an additional issue and decided the lis between the parties. In our view, the said issue is wholly relevant and si





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