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

1986 Supreme(Ker) 290

S.PADMANABHAN
Ahammed – Appellant
Versus
Mammad Kunhi – Respondent


Advocates:
P. N. K. Achan and K. Vijayan, for Appellant; C. R. Natarajan and R. Bhaskaran, for Respondents.

JUDGEMENT :- Appellant in this second appeal filed O.S.108/76 before the Subordinate Judge, Tellicherry for specific performance of Ext.A1 agreement for sale and also for injunction restraining the defendants from disturbing his possession. The suit was dismissed by the trial court and the decision was confirmed by the District Judge, Tellicherry in A.S. 248/78.

2. The subject-matter of the suit is 30 cents of land which belonged to defendants 2 and 3. They gave Ext. B6 power of attorney to the 1st defendant authorising him to sell ½ right over the said property. On the basis of that power 1st defendant entered into Ext. A1 agreement on 3-8-1974 with the plaintiff agreeing to sell the entire 30 cents for a consideration of Rs. 5,000/-. Rs. 2,500/- was received as advance on the date of Ext. A1. The further case of the appellant is that on the date of Ext. A1 itself he was put in possession of the entire 30 cents and the sale deed had to be taken on payment of the balance amount on or before 31-10-1974. Alleging that 1st defendant demanded a higher price and attempted to forcibly evict the plaintiff from the property he filed the suit.

3. The case put forward by the 1st defendant was










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