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

2023 Supreme(Bom) 2121

S. G. MEHARE
Javrilal Shantilal Kothari – Appellant
Versus
Gurucharansingh Bisansingh Bagga – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mukul S.Kulkarni, Advocate, Vinod P.Patil, Advocate

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. The plaintiffs have impugned the judgment and decree of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amalner, passed in Special Civil Suit No.27 of 2013, dtd. 7/1/2016 and judgment and decree of Regular Civil Appeal No.8 of 2016 passed by the learned District Judge-1, Amalner, dtd. 5/8/2019.

2. Both Courts denied the specific performance and held that the suit was time-barred. However, allowing the suit partly surprisingly, directed respondent no.1/vendor to refund the earnest amount with interest.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants has vehemently argued that both Courts did not consider the facts of the case. Both parties to the agreement were reciprocally accommodating to each other. The sale deed was to be executed after clearing the debts and encumbrance. The appellants and respondent No.1 were residing in one building. The appellants were tenants in the suit premises. The appellants possess the suit premises through a registered agreement to sell. Since the vendor had some difficulty, the appellants extended the time twice by executing separate agreements. However, in the last document extending the time to perform the part of the contract by the vendor, t

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