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

2010 Supreme(Mad) 1873

M.JAICHANDREN
Krishnan – Appellant
Versus
P. Palanisamy & Others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:P. Valliappan, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1 - S. Doraisamy, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order, dated 310. 2008, made in I.A.No.113 of 2003, in O.S.No.635 of 2001, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Namakkal.

2. Thepetitioner in the present civil revision petition is the plaintiff in the suit, in O.S.No.635 of 2001. The petitioner had filed the said suit against the respondents 2 to 5, for specific performance, to enforce the agreement for sale, dated 23. 1991, by which the petitioner had agreed to purchase the suit property, measuring an extent of 600 Sq.Ft, for a sale consideration of Rs.48,000/-. It had also been stated that on the date of the agreement for sale the petitioner had paid Rs.20,000/-, as advance and the balance amount of Rs.28,000/-was to be paid, on or before 23. 1995, on receipt of which the respondents 2 to 5 were liable to execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner.

3. On20.1.1995, a further sum of Rs.15,000/-had been paid by the petitioner and the period for performance had been extended till 11. 1999, by making the necessary endorsement. The petitioner has also stated that he is in possession of the suit property. However, the respondents 2 to 5 were evasive and n






























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