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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3257

P. T. ASHA
T. Subramani – Appellant
Versus
N. V. Karuppaiya – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:P. Jagadeesan, Advocate. For the Respondent:D. Shivakumaran, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the Judgement and Decree dated 01.04.2021 passed in A.S.No.18 of 2018 on the file of the Sessions (Fast Track Mahila) Judge, Namakkal confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 01.02.2018 passed in O.S.No.416 of 2010 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Namakkal.)

1. The unsuccessful plaintiff who has lost before the Courts below in a suit for specific performance has filed the above appeal, the same has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

''1) Whether the Lower Courts right in holding that the plaintiff failed to prove the due execution of the suit Agreement Ex.A1, especially, when the defendant categorically admitted his signature found in Ex.A1?

2) Whether or not the plaintiff proved the execution of Ex.A1 by examining the attestor of the document as PW2, who has spoken eloquently about the execution of the suit Sale Agreement Ex.A1?

3) Whether the Lower Courts right in holding that the plaintiff has not proved his readiness and willingness to perform his part of Contract, especially when he has paid almost the entire sale consideration and he issued the legal

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