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

2018 Supreme(Mad) 3403

R.HEMALATHA
D. Selvaraj – Appellant
Versus
Palaniswami – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
V. Selvaraj, R. Siddharthan.

JUDGMENT

1. The unsuccessful defendant in O.S. No. 59 of 1998 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Attur and the appellant in A.S. No. 108 of 2001 on the file of the II Additional Judge, Salem is the appellant herein.

2. The respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit in O.S. No. 59 of 1998 before the Sub Court, Attur praying for a specific performance of contract dated 25.01.1995 (Ex.B1). Briefly stated the case of the respondents/plaintiffs in O.S. No. 59 of 1998 is as follows. The first plaintiff for himself and on behalf of the 2nd plaintiff mortgaged the suit property with the defendant/appellant and a mortgage by conditional sale for a sum of Rs. 35,000/- was executed vide a registered deed dated 25.01.1995 (Ex.B1). As per the recitals of the said deed, the appellant/defendant agreed to transfer back the suit property within 5 years from the date of the deed (Ex.B1). The plaintiffs though were always ready and willing to perform their part of contract, the appellant/defendant evaded performance of their part of contract. Therefore, the plaintiff issued a telegram on 23.01.1998 showing his readiness and willingness to purchase the property as per the conditional sale deed (Ex.B1). The


















































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