Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.BALAJI
Senthil Kumar.K – Appellant
Versus
Sundaralingam Arumugam – Respondent
ORDER :
P.B. BALAJI, J.
1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the docket order dated 12.11.2025 made in I.A.S.F.R.No.4961 of 2025 in O.S.No.67 of 2024 on the file of the learned District Judge, Nilgiris District, Udhagamandalam.
2.I have heard Mr.M.Rajasekar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
3.The revision petitioner is the plaintiff, who filed an application for review under Section 114 of CPC r/w Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC to review the judgment and decree dated 17.07.2025, by amending the alternate relief granted in the suit, by creating a charge on the suit property as contemplated under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act.
4.The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that the revision petitioner filed O.S.No.67 of 2024 for specific performance of an agreement of sale, with an alternate relief of refund of advance amount. The trial Court declined to grant the relief of specific performance, but however, proceeded to grant a decree for refund of sum of Rs.73,48,163/-, together with interest at 12% per annum on Rs.70,00,000/-, within a period of four months. The trial Court has specifically given a finding that the plaintiff is not e
A statutory charge under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act cannot be granted by a court without framing a specific issue and conducting an inquiry into whether the buyer had fulfilled ....
Point of Law : Review jurisdiction is extremely limited and unless there is mistake apparent on the face of the record, the order/judgment does not call for a review.
A statutory charge under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act is enforceable against a bona fide purchaser for value, despite their claim to protection under the Specific Relief Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the plaintiff to a refund of advance money and the absence of a charge over the property in the absence of specific recital for ....
Buyer entitled to charged decree within limitation under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act if non-performance not due to buyer's fault.
Agreement for sale does not create charge on property; specific performance suit barred by limitation extinguishes refund claim absent statutory charge.
A second appeal under Section 100 of the C.P.C. requires a substantial question of law, which was not present in this case, coupled with the enforceability of statutory charges under the Transfer of ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
