Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR
Sabu Thomas – Appellant
Versus
N. Narayanan Namboothiri – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J.
The 2nd defendant in OS No. 245 or 2004 on the file of the Principal Sub Court Kottayam, is the appellant. (For the purpose of convenience the parties are hereafter referred to as per their rank before the trial court.)
2. The plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale entered into with the 1st defendant agreeing to sell the plaint schedule property for a total consideration Rs. 8,00,000/-. On the date of agreement for sale on 31.07.2003(Ext.A1), a sum of Rs. 5,05,000/- was paid to the 1st defendant as part of the sale consideration. As per the terms of the agreement, the sale deed was to be executed on or before 24.03.2004, after paying the balance sale consideration. According to the plaintiff, he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the sale agreement, but it could not be performed due to the default of the 1st defendant. Finally, on 24.03.2004, after informing the 1st defendant, the plaintiff reached the Sub Registrar's office with the balance sale consideration, expecting the 1st defendant to get the sale deed executed. However, the 1st defendant did not turn up. On enquiry, the plaintiff came to know
A statutory charge under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act is enforceable against a bona fide purchaser for value, despite their claim to protection under the Specific Relief Act.
The doctrine of lis pendens overrides the rights of bona fide purchasers when they acquire property during pending litigation concerning the same property, as established by case law.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's affirmation of the specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 05-8-1995, and the rejection of the 4th defendant's claim as a b....
Parties who invest in properties without knowledge of prior agreements can retain rights under Section 51 of the Transfer of Property Act, despite the existence of a decree.
Agreement to Sell – Protection provided under Section 53-A of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 is only a shield, and can only be resorted to as a right of defence – A person who is deemed to be in unla....
A pendente lite purchaser cannot assert independent title in execution proceedings, as the doctrine of lis pendens prevails over claims of bona fide purchasers under the Specific Relief Act.
Part Performance – Protection provided under Section 53-A of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 is only a shield, and can only be resorted to as a right of defence.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
