KRISHNAMOORTHY
Anandavally – Appellant
Versus
Natesan – Respondent
Both these revisions are by the decree-holder in O.S. No. 104 of 1988 in which a decree for specific performance of a contract for sale was passed. The decree was on 31-1-1990 and the defendant was directed to execute sale deed in respect of the suit property in favour of the plaintiff within one month from that date and that loo after receiving the balance sale consideration. It was further provided that if the defendant failed to execute the sale deed as ordered, the plaintiff will be at liberty to deposit the balance sale consideration in court and get the sale deed executed through court in execution of the decree. The cost was also awarded to the plaintiff. Plaintiff did not pay the balance sale consideration of Rs. 23,000/- as ordered in the decree. Thereafter, on 11-7-1990, the defendant, through his lawyer, sent Ext. A1 notice, intimating the plaintiff that he is ready to execute the sale deed on 1-8-1990 or on any other day convenient to her before 15-8-90 and further requested the plaintiff to be ready with the money for executing the sale deed. Though the plaintiff received this notice, she did not send any reply. On 4-10-1990, the defendant filed E.A 506 of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.