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

1976 Supreme(Del) 138

B.C.MISRA
GOPI CHAND – Appellant
Versus
BISHAMBER NATH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
MAEHSVAR DAYAL, R.N.Chitakara

B. C. Misra

( 1 ) THIS revision has been filed u/s 25 of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, against judgment dt. 17-1-73 by which it is held that the suit is not triable by Small Cause Court.

( 2 ) THE material facts of the case are that on 20-7-71, plaintiff-petitioner and defendant respondent entered into an agreement for purchase of an immovable property mentioned in the agreement. The sale price as agreed was Rs. 17,500. 00 out of which Rs. 500. 00 were paid in cash by the petitioners to the respondent as earnest money at the time of the agreement and the balance amount of Rs. 17,000. 00 was to be paid at the time of registration by 30th July, 1971. Clause (4) of the Contract provides that in case the vendor does not perform his part of the contract then on the expiry of the stipulated period it would be open to the vendee to cancel the contract for sale of the property and enforce the same through a court of law. On the other hand, the vendor was entitled to forfeit all the amount of the earnest money if the vendee did not pay the balance amount of the consideration and have registration in his name by the stipulated time.

( 3 ) IT is the common case of the parties that 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