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

2001 Supreme(Ker) 14

S.SANKARASUBBAN, A.LEKSHMIKUTTY
Velayudhan – Appellant
Versus
Velayudhan – Respondent


Judgment :-

S. Sankarasubban, J.

This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree in O.S. Mo. 175 of 1990 on the file of the Sub Court, Tirur, The suit was filed for specific performance of an agreement to sell the plaint schedule property. The agreement is produced as Ext. A6. According to the plaintiff, Ext. A6 was executed by defendants 1 and 2 for the sale of the plaint schedule property for a total consideration of Rs. 85,000/-, out of which, Rs. 70,000/- had been paid on the day on which Ext A6 was executed. The balance amount was agreed to be paid within one month and the sale deed executed.

2. According to the plaintiff, the plaintiff is a person, who is employed in Gulf Countries. The suit was filed by the power of attorney holder of the plaintiff. The balance amount was paid to the defendants. But they refused to accept the amount and also execute the sale deed. Ext. Al notice was issued to the defendants to which they replied staling dial they did not execute the document On the other hand, according to them, they had borrowed Rs. 15,000/- from the plaintiff when he last came from abroad. They promised to repay the amount within two years. Since this was not paid withi




























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