CHIDANANDA ULLAL
Y. R. MAHADEV – Appellant
Versus
K. DAYALAN – Respondent
( 1 ) THE instant appeal is filed to challenge the judgment and decree, dated 7-4-1994 in o. s. No. 4443 of 1990 on the file of the vi additional city civil judge, Bangalore, whereby the said judge had dismissed the suit of the appellant.
( 2 ) I heard the learned counsel for the appellant, Sri m. r. achar and the learned counsel for the respondent, Sri g. Lingappa. I have also perused the records.
( 3 ) THE facts in brief leading to the above appeal are as follows: that the appellant had filed suit in o. s. No. 4443 of 1990 on 30-7-1990 for a decree for specific performance of agreement of sale, dated 9-6-1988 executed by the respondent for sale of site bearing No. 67, formed by the Bangalore development authority in a layout called further extension of mahalakshmi layout, Bangalore, measuring 12. 20 metres into15. 50 + 14. 65 / 3 metres, that the sale consideration of Rs. 85,000/- and cash payment of Rs. 20,000/- was paid by the appellant to the respondent on the same day as advance amount, that the said site was allotted by the Bangalore development authority to the respondent under a letter of allotment, dated 5-5-1984 marked as ex. D-3 and the possession wa
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.