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

2017 Supreme(Mad) 3377

T.RAVINDRAN
Lakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Duraisamy – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :P. Saritha for M/s. Zeenath Begaum, Advocates.

JUDGMENT :

1. Challenge in this second appeal is made to the Judgment and Decree dated 29.10.1999 made in A.S.No.37 of 1998 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Salem, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 02.09.1998 made in O.S.No.1232 of 1996 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif Court, Salem.

2. Parties are referred to as per their rankings in the trial Court.

3. Suit for Specific Performance or in the alternative for the return of the advance amount and for possession.

4. The case of the plaintiffs, in brief, is that the plaintiffs and the defendants entered into a registered sale agreement on 03.02.1984 for the sale of the plaint schedule property for a sum of Rs.30,000/- and advance of Rs.19,000/- was paid towards the sale consideration on the date of the registered sale agreement above referred to and the said sum of Rs.19,000/- was made up as follows, i.e. the first defendant had executed a registered mortgage for a sum of Rs.10,000/- in favour of the plaintiffs on 01.07.1982 and the samehad been adjusted on the date of the sale agreement besides Rs.7,100/- paid in cash on the same date, in all amounting to a sum of Rs.19,000/- and the plaintiffs and th












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