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

2003 Supreme(Mad) 1881

A.KULASEKARAN
Mrs. Bama – Appellant
Versus
Mrs. Rukiyal Bivi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:V.Manisekaran, Advocate. For the Respondents: -

Judgment :-

When the matter is listed today for admission, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the same is disposed of in limine.

2. Defendant is the petitioner herein. Respondent filed a suit in O.S.No.33 of 1999 on the file of the Sub-Court, Ambasamudram, for specific performance. The petitioner herein filed an application in I.A.No.465 of 2002, seeking for a direction, under Order 18 Rule 1 of C.P.C., to direct the respondent/plaintiff, to begin the case, on the ground that the suit is one seeking for specific performance and the agreement for sale entered into between them was obtained by coercion, without receiving the sale consideration of Rs.2.00 lakhs. The respondent herein has filed a counter, stating that the execution of the agreement has been admitted; a sum of Rs.2.00 lakhs was paid; the suit was filed even prior to the expiry of the time stipulated in the agreement and the balance consideration of Rs.1.00 lakh was also deposited; while so, the petitioner herein has to begin the case. The Court below dismissed the application. Hence, the present revision.

3. Under Order 10 Rule 1 of C.P.C., the Court can examine the parties concerned, in order to ascert














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