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

2003 Supreme(Kar) 751

A.V.SRINIVASA REDDY
KHAMARUNNISA – Appellant
Versus
MUDALAPPA – Respondent


Advocates:
M.S.PURSHOTAM RAO

SRINIVASA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) IN this second appeal the appellant-plaintiff challenges the judgment and decree dated 17-8-1995 passed in R. A. No. 1/95 on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikkaballapur affirming the judgment and decree dated 16. 11. 1994 passed in O. S. No. 122/91 dismissing the suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale.

( 2 ) REFERENCE is made to the parties to this appeal by their rank and status in the suit.

( 3 ) THE plaintiff filed the suit on the following averments: The defendant as manager of his family entered into the 'suit agreement to sell two lands for a legal necessity of his family. The consideration of Rs. 30,000/- was paid in full. The defendant had agreed to execute a registered deed after removal of the then existing ban on registration of fragments. The plaintiff is ready and willing to perform her part of the contract but the defendant was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract despite causing issue of a legal notice demanding the defendant to execute the sale deed.

( 4 ) THE defendant denied the execution of the agreement itself.

( 5 ) BOTH the courts below have recorded concurrent findings to the effect that














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