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

1964 Supreme(AP) 15

KUMARAYYA, P.CHANDRA REDDY
Duddu Koteswara Rao – Appellant
Versus
Motumarru Sambiah – Respondent


CHANDRA REDDY, C. J.

( 1 ) THE proper interpretation of Exhibits A-1 and B-1 is the subject-matter of this appeal. The question that poses for consideration is whether the transactions evidenced by these two documents is a mortgage by conditional sale or an outright purchase.

( 2 ) THE property in dispute is a house site and terraced rooms situate therein. The agreement to sell this property appears to have been entered into on i6th july, 1923 for a sum of Rs. 3,400 and the whole of the consideration paid at about the time ; but the document of sale was not executed till the and of August, 1925. On the same day, the transferees executed an instrument agreeing to reconvey the property if the sum of Rs. 3,400 paid to the transferor was repaid to him with interest at 1 percent. permensem. Under this document the option to repurchase was to be exercised between 2nd February, 1926 and 30th July, 1927. The transferor did not avail himself of this right within the stipulated period. Nothing was done by him in this behalf till the 7th of February, 1950 when he called upon, the transferees to retransfer the property to him on receipt of such amounts as might be found due on taking of accoun


























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