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

2016 Supreme(AP) 21

U.DURGA PRASAD RAO
K. Bhudamma – Appellant
Versus
Vidyadevi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:M. Vijay Reddy, Advocate. For the Respondents:R1, K. B. Ramanna, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. Aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dt.28.06.2001 in O.S.NO.588 of 1999 passed by the learned V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, granting specific performance decree in favour plaintiff in respect of 42 sq. yds. of site containing one Mulgi and one room situated in Jawaharnagar, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad, the defendants preferred the instant appeal.

2. First defendant is the mother, defendant Nos. 3 to 5 are her sons and second defendant is her daughter-in-law i.e., wife of the deceased son—Ramalingam. The Plaintiff’s case in brief is that the defendants are the owners of the premises bearing No. SRT 344 admeasuring 170 sq.yards in Jawaharnagar, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad and out of the said property, they offered to sell a portion admeasuring 42 sq. yards consisting of one Mulgi and one room and the plaintiff agreed to purchase the said property for Rs.2,15,000/- and the defendants executed an Agreement of Sale dt. 2.8.1997 in favour of plaintiff and received an advance of Rs.5,000/- as part payment of sale consideration. It was agreed that the plaintiff should pay the balance of Rs.2,10,000/- at the time of delivery of possession or registration of the sa


































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