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

2004 Supreme(Mad) 1462

R.BANUMATHI
Murugesa Naicker (died) and others – Appellant
Versus
Govindaraja Nattar and another – Respondent


Advocates:
V.Raghavachari, for Appellants.
K.Kannan, for Respondents.

JUDGMENT: First defendant is the appellant. Aggrieved over the judgment and decree of the Sub Court, Cuddalore in A.S.No.167 of 1992, dated 15.9.1993, D-l has preferred this second appeal. Under the impugned judgment, the First Appellate Court has confirmed the judgment of District Munsif Court, Cuddalore in O.S.No.202 of 1989, dated 11.3.1992) granting decree for specific performance in favour of the plaintiffs and directed the first defendant to execute the sale deed.

2. The suit property relates to house site in T.S.No.1616 of Cuddalore Sudarsanam Street. Case of plaintiffs is that D-l has entered into an agreement of sale on 14.4.1980 for Rs.10,700. The suit property was the subject matter of litigation in the earlier suit and proceedings in S.A.No.1175 of 1966. Possession was about to be taken through the process of Court. Sale consideration of Rs.3,000 paid as advance under the earlier agreement of sale dated 3.10.1971 was adjusted towards the sale consideration under the suit agreement. Further, on the date of agreement of sale, plaintiffs have paid a sum of Rs.1,000 to D-l besides another sum of Rs.700 received by D-l already; in all total sum of Rs.4,700 was received by D-l












































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