MOTILAL B. NAIK, J.

( 1 ) THESE four Revision Petitions arise out of a common order dated 10-4-1992 passed by the Second Additional District Judge, East Godavari district at Rajahmundry in LA. Nos. 450 / 91 in O. S. No. 4/89; 449/91 in O. S. No. 88/88, 451/91 in O. S. No. 5 / 89 and 452 / 91 in O. S. No. 6/89 respectively. Since the question involved in these revision petitions is one and the same, they are disposed of by common order.

( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case are as follows :- Bhamidipati Gopalakrishna Murthy, plaintiff in O. S. Nos. 88 / 88 and 4/89 and 1st defendant in O. S. Nos. 5 and 6 of 1989 (one of the respondents in the revision petitions), is said to have entered into an agreement of sale, which is the subject-matter of suits, on 9-1-1983 with the revision petitioner for a consideration of Rs. 95,000/ -. Prior to the agreement, the said Gopalakrishna Murthy is said to have entered into an agreement of sale on 9-5-1976 in respect of the same property with the defendants in O. S. Nos. 88/88 and 4/89 for a consideration of Rs. 18,500/ -. Since the defendants in those two suits failed to pay the balance sale consideration of the agreement dated 9-5-1976 within the sti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document