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

1991 Supreme(Cal) 64

AMULYA KUMAR NANDI
NEBUBALA SARDAR – Appellant
Versus
ABDUL AZIZ BAIDYA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ASHISH BAKSHI, PRADIP CHAKRAVARTY

A. K. NANDI, J.

( 1 ) THE Second Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree passed in Title Appeal No. 770 of 1977 by the 3rd Court of the Additional District Judge, Alipore, 24 Parganas.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of contract of sale.

( 3 ) THE plaint case is that the defendant filed Title Suit No. 313 of 1971 against the plaintiff and others. The suit ended in a compromise. One of the terms of the petition of compromise was that the plaintiff would pay a sum of Rs. 550/- to the defendant by Chaitra, 1381 and the defendant in turn would execute a Deed of Sale in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit land. The defendant did not execute the sale Deed in spite of tender of a sum of Rs. 550/- by the plaintiff. The defendant refused to accept the money and execute the deed. Time was not essence of the contract. The plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part of contract and the defendant did not deliberately discharge his obligation under the contract. Therefore, the suit has been filed.

( 4 ) THE defence is that the time was the essence of the contract. The plaintiff did not tender the money to the defendant wit





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