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

2007 Supreme(Mad) 3457

P.JYOTHIMANI
Sakunthala – Appellant
Versus
Anandarajan – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:S.S. Swaminathan, Advocate. For the Respondent:Pradeep Kumar, T. Dhanyakumar, Advocate.

Judgment :-

The revision petitioner, who is the plaintiff in the suit, filed this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order of the learned District Munsif, Alandur in allowing the application filed by the 5th defendant in the suit under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for rejecting the proof affidavit filed by the Power Agent of the plaintiff, Mrs.Sakunthala.

2. The petitioner filed the suit for specific performance of a contract of sale stated to have been entered orally on 20.04.1994 and for a direction against the defendants to execute and register sale deed after receiving the additional sale consideration of Rs.15,000/- and also for permanent injunction. The defendants have filed written statement denying categorically that no contract or oral agreement was entered on 20.04.1994 to sell the suit property to the plaintiff. Further, the fixation of sale price at Rs.15,000/- is also denied. However, the defendants have stated that they have given power in favour of the 4th defendant, who, on his behalf and as power of attorney agent, sold the land in favour of one Sabeena Beevi. It is the definite case of the defendants in the written s

















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