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

2017 Supreme(Mad) 575

N.SATHISH KUMAR
Soundarrajan – Appellant
Versus
Vettobai – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. A. Palaniappan
For the Respondent: Mr. M.Sriram

JUDGMENT :

The non-suited plaintiff has preferred the instant appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Principal District Judge, Thiruvallur in O.S.No.64 of 2006.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to, as per their ranking before the trial Court.

3. The plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.64 of 2006, before the learned Principal District Judge, Thiruvallur, for specific performance for a sale consideration of Rs.8,40,000/- to an unperformed contract on a sale agreement dated 15.07.1999.

4. The brief facts of the case of the plaintiff are as follows:

(i) The 1st defendant is the owner of the suit property. By agreement dated 15.07.1999, the 1st defendant has agreed to convey an extent of 1 acre 56 cents to the plaintiff for a total sale consideration of Rs.23,40,000/-. On the date of agreement, a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- was paid as advance. Time stipulated to complete the contract was 9 months. However, the same is not conclusive one. After the agreement, the property was handed over to the plaintiff and he was empowered to supervise the same, converting the same into house plots and to erect boundary stones to form roads and also to negotiate the sale of































































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