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

2026 Supreme(Mad) 168

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.BALAJI
C. Sumathi – Appellant
Versus
P. Manjula – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. I. Abdul Basith

Table of Content
1. plaintiff's suit for specific performance. (Para 1 , 3)
2. arguments regarding agreement validity and fraud. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. points of consideration formulated by court. (Para 9 , 10)
4. evaluation of plaintiff's readiness and willingness. (Para 11 , 12)
5. court's refusal to entertain additional evidence. (Para 13 , 14)
6. dismissal of the appeal suit. (Para 15)

JUDGMENT :

The plaintiff, whose suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale has been dismissed by the Trial Court, is the appellant.

2. I have heard Mr.I.Abdul Basith, learned counsel for the appellant. Despite the respondent having entered appearance by way of caveat and several opportunities being granted for the appearance of the respondent, none showing up, I proceeded to hear the learned counsel for the appellant.

3. PLEADINGS:

(a) Plaint in brief:

The plaintiff entered into an agreement of sale with the defendant, the owner of the suit property on 18.12.2014, for a total sale consideration of Rs.16,00,000/-. The plaintiff has paid an advance of Rs.10,00,000/- and he was ready to pay the balance Rs.6,00,000/-. The defendant demanded further advance of Rs.2,00,000/- to meet family expenses

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