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

1965 Supreme(Mad) 436

VENKATADRI
Manicka Gounder – Appellant
Versus
Samikannu Gounder – Respondent


Advocates:
K. N. Balasubramaniam, for Appellant; K. V. Venkataseshadri, for Respondent.

ORDER :- This appeal arises out of execution proceedings in O. S. 297 of 1961, a suit instituted by the respondent for specific performance of an agreement to reconvey the suit property dated 13-6-1969 executed by the appellant to the respondent. The suit itself was compromised and a consent decree was passed in and by which the respondent (plaintiff) should deposit a sum of Rs. 800 on or before 15-11-1962 and also deposit the necessary general stamp papers into court for the appellant to reconvey the property to the respondent on such deposit of the said amount by the respondent. The respondent did not deposit the amount as mentioned in the said decree on or before 15-11-1962 but filed E. P. 605 of 1962 on 26-11-1962, after depositing the sum of Rs. 800 and praying the court that the appellant might be directed to execute a sale deed in favour of the respondent as per the terms of the compromise decree. By abundant caution, the respondent filed M. P. 935 of 1962 in O. S. 297 of 1961 for extension of time for payment of the said sum of Rupees 800 as per the terms of the consent decree. He set up a plea that on or before 15-11-1962 he tendered the money to the judgment debtor (appe












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