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

1957 Supreme(Pat) 30

SINHA, K.DAYAL
Indar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Parmeshwardhari Singh – Respondent


Judgment

Dayal, J.

1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs. The suit was a suit for a declaration that the plaintiffs have acquired valid title to the disputed properties by virtue of their purchase under a registered sale-deed dated the 28th April 1944. The disputed properties belonged to late Babu Mangaldhari Singh, father of defendant No. 1.

2. The case of the plaintiffs was that Babu Mangaldhari Singh died a year back, leaving defendant No. 1, his son, as his heir. Defendant No. 1 contracted to sell the disputed properties for Rs. 7,000 to the plaintiffs by executing a contract of sale dated the 19th April 1944, in their favour and that the plaintiffs paid Rs. 700 as an advance at that time. Subsequently, defendant No. 1 executed a sale deed in the plaintiffs favour on the 28th April 1944. Out of the consideration of Rs. 7,000, Rs. 700 had been paid as advance, as stated above; Rs. 1,300, being the decretal dues of the plaintiffs, was set off; Rs. 4,000 was kept in deposit with the plaintiffs to be paid to Sheo Prasad Singh, the Ijaradar of the Milkiat interest of the disputed properties. The balance of Rs. 1,000 was said to have been paid in cash to defendant No. 1 at the time h





















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