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

2014 Supreme(Mad) 4195

S.TAMILVANAN
Kannan – Appellant
Versus
S. Damodaran – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant:G. Rajan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:S. Mukund for M/s. Sarvabhauman Associates, Advocates.

Judgment

1. The second appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree, dated 22.03.2007 passed in A.S.No.11 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruvannamalai, confirming the judgment and decree, dated 30.11.2005 made in O.S.No.1014 of 2004 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif (District Judge Training), Tiruvannamalai.

2. The appellant herein was the defendant before the Trial court and the suit was filed by the respondent herein seeking specific performance of a contract. The respondent/plaintiff has averred that after receiving the sale consideration of Rs.28,000/-, as per the terms of the registered conditional sale deed, dated 17.05.2003, delivery of possession of the suit property should be given to the respondent/plaintiff by the appellant/defendant. However, the appellant/defendant was not ready and willing to receive the consideration back and execute sale deed in terms of the conditional sale deed, hence, the suit was filed by respondent/plaintiff, seeking specific performance of contract. The suit was decreed by the trial court, by its judgment, dated 30.11.2005, directing the appellant/defendant to execute re-conveyance deed, as p

























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