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

1986 Supreme(AP) 229

K.RAMASWAMY
Tahera Sayeed – Appellant
Versus
M. Shanmugam – Respondent


K. RAMA SWAMY, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is possessed of the house bearing No. 10-2-287/1 in A. C. Guards, Santhinagar, Hyderabad which respondent 3, Periaswamy purchased in two portions, A portion in the name of his wife and daughter (respondents 4 and 5) and B portion in his name, under two sale-deeds dated 31/03/1978 and 15/07/1979, respectively. It is the case of the petitioner that the cheques issued by Periaswamy as consideration for the sale of B portion house were bounced and thus received no consideration; thereby Periaswamy played fraud on her. On demand, Periaswamy surrendered possession of the B portion under Ex. A-4 affidavit dated 4/09/1980. The petitioner laid the suit, O. S. No. 1307/80 which was renumbered as O. S. No. 306/82 in the Court of the Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, to declare that the sale as invalid or for specific performance. He also filed I. A. 1492/80 against Periaswamy for ad interim injunction restraining him from interfering with her possession. Interim injunction was granted and it was made absolute, which was upheld by this Court in C. M. A. 240/81 dated 29/07/1981.

( 2 ) WHILE the matters stood thus, it emerges that Periaswamy pu











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