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

2010 Supreme(AP) 678

L.NARASIMHA REDDY
P. Ravi Prasad Goud – Appellant
Versus
P. Krishna – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:L.V. Ramana Rao, Advocate. For the Respondents:

JUDGMENT :-

The petitioner filed O.S.No.267 of 2007 in the Court of III Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad against the respondents for the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale. The suit was decreed ex parte on 31.12.2007. It was to the effect that the petitioner shall pay the balance of consideration of Rs.5,25,000/-to the respondents within one month and if they refused to receive the amount, it shall be deposited into the Court within one month thereafter. That means by the end of February 2008, the amount should have been either paid to the respondents or deposited into the Court.

The petitioner filed an E.P., for execution of the decree. He filed E.A.No.360 of 2008 under Section 148 of C.P.C. with a prayer to enlarge the time stipulated for depositing of the balance of sale consideration. The trial Court dismissed the I.A., through order dated 20.02.009. The same is challenged in this revision.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was ready to deposit the balance of sale consideration but was prevented from doing so, on account of serious ill-health. He contends that the respondents remained ex parte not only in the sui



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