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

1996 Supreme(AP) 115

B.K.SOMASEKHARA
C. N. Vittal Rao, Secunderabad – Appellant
Versus
Srihari, Hyderabad – Respondent


( 1 ) THE judgment and decree of the learned Additional judge,city Civil Court, hyderabad in O. S. No. 1391 of 1981, dated 22-1-1983 has been the subject of this appeal. The appellant is the defendant in O. S. No. 1391 of 1981. The respondent is the Plaintiff. The suit was filed for specific performance of the suit agreement, ex. A-1, dated 14-1-1976 followed by another agreement, Ex. A-2, dated 12-7- 1976 or in the alternative for refund of Rs. 5,000/- with interestat 18 percent per annum from the date of receipt till payment, for costs, etc. The suit property is described in the Plaint Schedule as follows: "plot No. 2 admeasuring about 350 sq. yards situated at Padmaraonagar, secunderabad bounded by North: By Plot No. 1 belonging to C. N. Vittal rao, South : Plot No. 3 belonging to C. N. Vittal Rao, By East: Land and building belonging to C. P. Natrajan and By West: Proposed 30 road. " defendant is the owner of the suit property. He entered into an agreement with the Plaintiff to sell the suit plot of land at a rate of Rs. 60/- per Square Yard, received an advance of Rs. 5,000 / -, a greed to receive the bal ance of the amount on the date of registration and the sale transaction














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