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

1976 Supreme(Mad) 204

M.M.ISMAIL
Vaiyapuri Gounder – Appellant
Versus
Kalianna Gounder – Respondent


Advocates:
S. Sethuratnam, T. Samasundaram and A.S. Venkatachalamurthy, for Appellant.
M. Venkatachalapathy, for Respondent.

JUDGMENT. The plaintiff in O.S. No. 678 of 1967 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of Gobichettipalayam, who succeeded before the Trial Court, but lost before the first appellate Court, in the appellant herein. Admittedly the suit properties originally belonged to the joint family of one Krishna Gounder and his sons. The said Krishna Gounder acting for himself and as guardian of his minor sons sold the suit properties to the defendant on 17th October, 1962 for a consideration of Rs. 1,500. Subsequently under Exhibit A-1 dated 17th June, 1963 the defendant in the present suit entered into an agreement with Krishna Gounder agreeing to sell the suit properties to him for a consideration of Rs. 1,500 and received an advance of Rs. 10 and it was agreed that the balance was to be paid and the sale deed to be executed in any Chithirai Kalavathi’ within four years. Admittedly Krishna Gounder assigned the right secured under Exhibit A-l in favour of the plaintiff in the present action under Exhibit A-2 dated 6th April, 1964. Admittedly the plaintiff did not pay the balance in any Chithirai Kalavathi within four years, but offered to pay the balance and take the sale-deed 34 day











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