THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI
Faizal Eroth – Appellant
Versus
Venkalath Raveendran – Respondent
Ramakrishna Pillai, J. - The plaintiffs are in appeal.
2. The appellants approached the court below for a decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell the suit properties. By the impugned decree, the court below refused the relief of specific performance to the appellants and only a decree for return of advance amount with interest was granted. In this appeal, the appellants are challenging the correctness of the impugned judgment and decree. Now the plaint allegations in brief: Plaint mentioned property belonging to the respondents was agreed to be sold to the appellants by virtue of an agreement dated 14.11.2005 which was prepared in counterparts. The sale consideration was fixed at the rate of Rs.5 lakhs per cent out of which, Rs.50 lakhs was paid on the date of agreement itself and Rs.25 lakhs was paid on 2.2.2006, as agreed. Thereafter, the respondents demanded another sum of Rs.4.5 lakhs urgently and the said amount was also paid by the appellants to the respondents through one Ramesh on 28.7.2006. Though the said payment was assured to be acknowledged, the respondents failed to do so. Eight months' time was prescribed for performance of the agreement. I
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.