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

2002 Supreme(AP) 264

L.NARASIMHA REDDY
Yelamati Veera Venkata Jaganadha Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Vejju Venkateswara Rao – Respondent


L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THESE two appeals arise out of a common judgment of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Tadepalligudem, rendered in O. S. Nos. 44 and 158 of 1988. Hence, they are disposed of together. The parties to both the suits as well as the appeals are common. A. S. No. 40199 is filed by the plaintiff in O. S. No. 44/88. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in O. S. No. 44/88.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff filed the suit seeking relief of specific performance of an oral agreement said to have taken place on 1-5-1988 between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant. It was the case of the plaintiff that it is the tenant in respect of the suit schedule property (ground floor) from 1973 onwards, the 1st defendant was taking hand loans of various amounts from time to time from the plaintiff, on 1-5-1988 the 1st defendant approached them offering to sell the property for a consideration of Rs. 2. 00 lakhs, on that day itself they paid an advance of Rs. 50,000/-, the balance of Rs. 1. 50 lakhs was payable on or before 11-5-1988, on the request of the 1st defendant they paid another amount of Rs. 50,000/- on 6-5-1988 and were ready and willing to pay the balan








































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