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

1997 Supreme(Del) 107

B.K.RAMAMOORTHY
BHUSHAN TYAGI – Appellant
Versus
ATTAR KALI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ANAND YADAV, N.K.KANTAWALA, RAMESH CHANDRA

K. Ramamoorthy, J.

( 1 ) IA No. 12079/95 is filed on behalf of the defendant under Order 9 Rule 7 and under Section 151 Civil Procedure Code for recalling the order dated 11. 10. 1995 by which the defendant had been set exparte.

( 2 ) AS a matter of fact, order dated 11. 10. 1995 is only the repetition of the order dated 17. 04. 1995 and that is not an independent order setting the defendant ex parte.

( 3 ) THE plaintiff has filed the suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 21. 04. 1989. The plaint was presented on 13. 06. 1989. The defendant in the written statement stated that she is leading a very comfortable life. The income of the defendant from the agriculture and from deposits on the compensation amount, is more than the savings. According to her, she is enjoying surplus money. In para 4 of the written statement she stated thus: In the circumstances as above in which the defendant is placed there is no agreement made for the sale or transfer of any land by the defendant. She cannot and will never execute an instrument for the conveyance of her lands in any manner whatsoever. All her affairs are in the control and supervision of her son and he has never a












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