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

2020 Supreme(Mad) 413

N.SESHASAYEE
M. Chinnaiyan – Appellant
Versus
Kasthuri Radhakrishnan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant:V. Raghavachari, Senior Counsel for V.P.K. Goutham, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1 to R4, M.K. Kabir, Senior Counsel Assisted by V.P. Sengottuvel, R5, R. Jayaseelan, Standing Counsel.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: First Appeal filed under Section 96 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge cum Fast Track Court No.I, Erode in O.S.No.3 of 2006 dated 11.11.2008.)

Preliminary statement

1.1 The plaintiff in O.S.No.3 of 2006 on the file of Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court-I), Erode, is the appellant herein. He laid the suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 30.07.1987 with an alternate prayer for return of the advance amount paid under the agreement of sale. The trial court rejected both.

1.2 Challenging the decree, the plaintiff has appealed to this Court. The parties would be referred to by their rank before the trial court.

2.1 The suit property is a residential house, and it was constructed on a site allotted to a certain Radhakrishnan by the 5th defendant, the Tamil Nadu Housing Board (henceforth would be referred to as Housing Board). The defendants 1 to 4 claim under Radhakrishnan.

2.2 The allottee of the site Radhakrishnan had executed Ext.A-1 sale agreement, dated 30.07.1987, in favour of one Pongia

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