PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
Chinnasellan – Appellant
Versus
Santha – Respondent
1. The plaintiff, who got a decree before the trial Court, viz., District Munsif, Krishnagiri, by judgment and decree dated 12.07.2006 in O.S. No. 166 of 1995, which was set aside by the lower Appellate Court, viz., Principal Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri, in A.S. No. 82 of 2006 vide judgment and decree dated 13.11.2008, has projected the instant Second Appeal.
2. According to the plaintiff, who claims to be the original owner of the suit lands, on 10.9.1993, he executed a sale deed in favour of the defendant conveying the suit lands for a consideration of Rs.11,000/- on her promise that she would execute an agreement deed to reconvey the suit lands on payment of the amount within a period of three years. It is stated that the plaintiff also paid a sum of Rs.10/- towards advance and the defendant agreed that on payment of the balance sale consideration of Rs.10,990/- on or before 10.9.1996, she shall execute the sale deed conveying the suit schedule land in his favour and accordingly, she executed a reconveyance agreement deed on 10.09.1993 itself. The main allegation of the plaintiff is that though he was ready to pay the balance sale consideration amount of Rs.10,990/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.