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

1964 Supreme(Cal) 182

H.K.BOSE, G.K.MITTER
JITENDRA NATH ROY – Appellant
Versus
MAHESWARI BOSE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.N.SEN, R.MITRA

MITTER, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a purchaser's appeal from a decree refusing specific performance of an agreement for sare of immoveable property dated December 15, 1954. The learned trial Judge found that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement at all relevant times and that the agreement for sale was duly cancelled by the defendant.

( 2 ) THE undisputed facts prior to the date of the suit filed on May 21, 1957 are as follows: The negotiation for the property i. e. premises Nos. 34a and 34b, Amherst Street were carried on between two solicitors namely Mr. Anil Kumar Ghose for the purchaser and Mr. Anil Kumar Dutta for the vendor commencing in the first week of December 1954, The vendor was one Maheswari Bose a Hindu widow, who wanted to sell the property for legal necessity. (After dealing with the correspondence between the solicitors the judgment proceeded to deal with the relevant terms of the draft agreement dated 13-12-1954 ). The terms of the agreement relevant for the purpose of this appeal are as follows:-- (1) The vendor agrees to sell as a Hindu widow the said two properties free from all incumbrances at Rs. 32,000/- out of which Rs. 501/-
















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