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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 3123

R. SUBRAMANIAN, R. KALAIMATHI
Rangasamy – Appellant
Versus
K. S. Periyasamy – Respondent


For the Appellants :Sharath Chandran, Advocate. For the Respondents:R1, Manokaran, R2 & R3, Radha Gopalan, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: These appeals are filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Order 41 Rule 1 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 24.04.2012 passed in O.S.No.6 of 2009 on the file of the learned District Judge of Nilgiris at Udhagamandalam.)

Common Judgment:

R. Subramanina, J.

1.Both these Appeals arise out of OS No.6 of 2009 on the file of the District Court, Nilgiris. While the defendants 2 and 3 are the appellants in AS No.103 of 2014, the fourth defendant in the said suit is the appellant in AS No.967 of 2012. The suit in OS No.6 of 2009 was filed by the first respondent in both these Appeals, in his capacity as an assignee of an agreement of sale dated 22.08.1996, seeking refund of the advance paid under the said Sale Agreement.

2. The first defendant and his brother Sampathkumar entered into an agreement of sale with a Limited Company called M/s.Club India Resorts (P) Limited. On 22.08.1996 agreeing to sell an extent of 12.33 acres of land situate at Manjanakorai Village, Ootacamund, for a consideration of Rs.1,31,00,000/-. According to the plaintiff, the said Company paid an advance of Rs.30,00,000/- by way of two cheques on 22.08.1996, thereaft

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