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

1953 Supreme(Bom) 99

H.K.CHAINANI, P.B.GAJENDRAGADKAR
Hastimal Dalichand Bora and Ors. – Appellant
Versus
Hiralal Motichand Mutha – Respondent


JUDGMENT - Gajendragadkar, J.

1. This appeal from order and revisional application have been filed by the defendants against orders passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar, in suit No. 60 of 1948. It appears that there was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants in regard to the transfer of house No. 2665 at Ahmednagar. A dispute arose between the parties as to the nature of this agreement. The plaintiff alleged that it was an agreement to sell the property, whereas according to the defendants they had merely agreed to mortgage the property. This dispute was referred by the parties to arbitration on January 25, 1948. The arbitrator then made his award.

He was of the opinion that the agreement between the parties was one of mortgage and not of sale and on that footing the award purports to direct defendants Nos. 1 to 3 to pay the plaintiff Rs. 8,500 and interest at the rate mentioned in the award. This amount was made payable by six monthly instalments of Rs. 1,000 each. The award then goes on to direct that if defendants Nos. 1 to 3 did not pay the amount to the plaintiff as directed, the plaintiff should proceed to recover that amount by sale of


































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