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

1996 Supreme(Raj) 109

K.RAMASWAMY, G.B.PATTANAIK
Babulal – Appellant
Versus
Raj Kumar – Respondent


JUDGMENT – Leave granted.

(2). Though the respondents have been served, the second respondent has filed a photo-copy of the Power of Attorney on behalf of respondents Nos.1 and 3 to 6 but when the Registry directed him to produce the original he failed to do the same. He is also not present in the Court. One Shyam Lal, son of Prabhu Lal Kayasth had laid the suit for specific performance; the Civil Judge dismissed the suit but on appeal No. 16/1973 by judgment and decree dated October 18, 1973, the suit was decreed as under :

``Appeal is accepted with cost. Judgment and decree under appeal is set aside and suit for specific performance of contract is decreed with costs that defendants as per contract Ex. 1 at 1.9.66 shall execute sale deed within 3 months and plaintiff shall pay the balance sum to the defendant in the said period, otherwise plaintiff shall be entilled to get the sale deed executed of the disputed property as per the law depositing the balance amount in the Court within two months.

(3). In the suit there was prayer of specific performance with possession of the property in prayer I thus :

``It be decreed that defendants should perform their part of the contract regarding










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