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

2022 Supreme(Kar) 1526

ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
Govind N. Malu – Appellant
Versus
Chowdaiah – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
S.Subramanya Bhat, Advocate, M.Murali, Advocate, P.N.Krishnankutty Achan, Advocate, P.Subramanya Bhat, Advocate

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. In RSA No.642/2009 and RSA No.641/2009, the appellant is questioning the divergent findings in RA Nos.22/2009 and 26/2009 respectively on the file of the Principal District Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru. In terms of the impugned judgment and decree dtd. 17/2/2009 by allowing the appeal filed by defendants No.1 and 2, the suit for the specific performance of the contract is dismissed.

2. The suit in O.S. No.5/2005 was filed by the present appellant for the relief of specific performance of the contract dtd. 4/10/2004. Though there is no specific reference to the date of the agreement in the prayer, from the pleading it is apparent that the suit is filed to enforce the contract dtd. 4/10/2004 executed by the 1st defendant.

3. The subject matter of the suit is an agricultural land bearing Sy. No.250 measuring 4 acres situated at Kadanoor Village, Doddaballapur Taluk. The plaintiff has sought relief against the first defendant who executed the agreement for sale agreeing to sell the property at a price of Rs.1, 80, 000.00 per acre. Plaintiff claims to have paid Rs.2, 00, 000.00 as advance. Plaintiff was supposed to pay Rs.5, 20, 000.00. The second defendan

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