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

1991 Supreme(Kar) 388

D.P.HIREMATH, N.D.V.BHATT
M. C. KENDALL – Appellant
Versus
S. CHANDRASHEKAR – Respondent


Advocates:
B.S.Pranesh Rao, B.S.SUBRAHMANIAM, S.S.Ullal

N. D. V. BHAT, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is preferred against the Judgment and decree dated 13-8-1981 passed by the Principal Civil Judge, Bangalore District, Bangalore in O. S. No. 61/1980.

( 2 ) THE facts relevant for the disposal of this appeal, briefly stated, are as under: Plaintiff filed a suit at O. S. No. 61/1980 before the Court of Principal Civil Judge, bangalore District praying for a decree for specific performance of the agreement said to have been taken place between him and defendant-1 on 21-1-1980 in respect of Sy. Nos. 23, 24, 26 and 27/3 of Gottigere Village, Bangalore District. In short the case of the plaintiff is as under : An agreement of sale of the aforesaid Sy. Nos. was entered into on 21-1-1980 between the plaintiff and defendant-1. The sale price was fixed at Rs. 1,46,000/ -. It was agreed that on the said date that plaintiff should pay rs. 39,000/- to defendant-1 and defendant-1 should deliver possession of the aforesaid lands to the plaintiff on 23-1-1980. It was also agreed that the sale deed should be executed within 60 days from 21-1-1980. The formal agreement in that behalf was required to be executed on 23-1-1980 and an amount of Rs. 1,001/- was also pa












































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