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

1981 Supreme(Mad) 60

V.BALASUBRAHMANYAN
T. Thangamuthu – Appellant
Versus
A. Gowrishanker – Respondent


ORDER

V. Balasubrahmanyan, J.

1. This is a small cause revision. The plaintiff in this case filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 500 from the defendant. The claim related to the refund of advance paid by the plaintiff to the defendant under a written agreement for the purchase of a house-site in a layout. Under the terms of the agreement, the defendant undertook to obtain the sanction of the concerned municipal authorities for the lay-out. The plaintiff pleaded that while he was always ready and willing to pay the balance of the price for the house-site, the defendant had failed and neglected even to obtain the sanction for the lay-out. The suit was accordingly laid for the refund of the advance since, according to the plaintiff, the defendant had committed breach of the agreement.

2. The defendant resisted the suit. He raised in the forefront, an objection to the maintainability of the suit. He contended that the suit, as laid, was for specific performance of a contract and hence barred under Entry 15 of the Schedule to the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887. Trying this issue as a preliminary issue, the Court held that the plaintiff's suit was not a suit for specific performance o



















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