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

1998 Supreme(AP) 520

A.HANUMANTHU
Vemula Shanker – Appellant
Versus
Nakod Pandarinath – Respondent


A. HANUMANTHU, J.

( 1 ) THIS second appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code has been preferred against the Judgment and decree dated 4-12-1989 passed in AS No. 10 of 1989 on the file of the District Judge, Adilabad, confirming the judgment and decree dated 18-4-1989 passed in OS No. 55 of 1984 on the file of the District Munsif, Adilabad. The appellant herein is the defendant and the respondent herein is the plaintiff in the said suit OS No. 55 of 1984.

( 2 ) THE respondent-plaintiff filed that suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 17-1-1981 (Ex. A1) against the appellant-defendant and in the alternative for return of the advance money paid by him at the time of execution of the said agreement of sale. The trial Court decreed the suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale. The first appellate Court confirmed the said judgment and decree of the trial Court. Aggrieved of that, the defendant has come up with this second appeal.

( 3 ) THE only substantial question of law raised by Sri P. S. Murthy, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, is that under the provisions of Section 20 (2) (b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (here













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