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

1964 Supreme(Ker) 311

S.VELU PILLAI
Muhammed – Appellant
Versus
Govardhanlal – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The appellant sued to recover the sum of Rs. 3,750/- and interest from the first defendant, who may be referred to as the respondent, and from the estate of his deceased brother Poppattalal, represented in the suit by his widow and children, who are respondents 2 to 4. Poppattalal and the respondent sold a property to the appellant by Ext. P-2 in the year 1119, for a consideration of Rs. 3,750/-. At the time, there was in force, a contract for the sale of the property to Mohammed for Rs. 1,651/- of which they had received Rs. 1000/- in advance. Mohammed sued the respondents and others, including the appellant and Pw.1 the assignee of the property from the appellant under Ext. P-1, in O.S. 105 of 1121 for specific performance of the contract. On the impleadment of Pw.1 on the basis of Ext. P.1, the appellant was removed from the array of parties. In second appeal, specific performance was allowed and the case was remanded for passing a final decree on settlement of the value of improvements, if any, payable to Pw.1. Before the final decree was passed, the appellant commenced the suit from which this second appeal arises, on the 22nd January, 1957, for refund of the co







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