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

1996 Supreme(Mad) 305

RAJU
Pitchan Ambalam – Appellant
Versus
Kasi Pitchan Ambalam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant:E. Padmanabhan & G. Ethirajulu, Advocates.
For the Respondent:B.S. Gnanadesikan, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. The above Second Appeal has been filed by the second defendant in OS No. 2071 of 1979 on the file of the Dist. Munsifs Court, Dindigul, who was successful before the trial Court, but failed before the lower appellate court, against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Dindigul, dt. 18.10.1982 in A.S. No. 136/1981 reversing the judgment and decree of the learned trial Judge, dt. 30.9.1981 in O.S. No. 2071/1979. The first respondent/plaintiff filed O.S. No. 2071/1979 for specific performance and for directing defendants 3 to 7, the legal representatives of the first defendant to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff as per the terms and conditions of the sale agreement dt. 18.4.1979 and if the defendants 3 to 7 fail to do so, to execute the same through Court and also for a decree for permanent injunction, restraining the defendants, their men and agents from in any manner interfering with the plaintiffs alleged possession and enjoyment of the suit properties. The case of the plaintiff is that the first defendant has entered into an agreement of sale to sell the three suit items or properties under Ex. A3 dt. 18.4.1979, that pursuant to t

















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