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

2011 Supreme(Kar) 169

D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR
Somanagouda – Appellant
Versus
Shamshiddin – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants:Madanmohan M. Khannur, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mahesh Wodeyar, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. This second appeal by the aggrieved first defendant in OS No 60 of 2001. On the file of Civil Judge (Jr Dn) & JMFC, Savanur, who though successfully defended the suit for specific performance of the agreement dated 9.1.1989 and got the suit dismissed not on the ground of non-execution of the agreement but on the ground of want of readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff-agreement holder to perform his part of the agreement, but was not so successful in the appeal of the plaintiff before the lower appellate court, wherein the adverse finding against the plaintiff came to be reversed and the suit came to be decreed and the first defendant was directed to execute registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff within three months from the date of judgment i.e. 21.4.2010, which judgment is questioned in this second appeal.

2. While the memorandum of appeal, the following three substantial questions of law, are indicated:

a) Whether the Appellate Court is justified in not exercising proper discretionary powers?

b) Whether the Appellate Court is justified in reversing the Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court when there was no evidence regarding the execution











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