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

1964 Supreme(Ori) 25

G.K.MISRA
SACHIDANANDA PATNAIK – Appellant
Versus
G. P. AND CO. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.M.PATNAIK, K.P.MOHANTY, N.C.ROY, R.C.MOHANTY, R.K.Monapatra, S.C.ROY

G. K. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) DEFENDANTS are the appellants. Defendant 2 is the brother and authorised agent of defendant 1 Plaintiff's case is that the disputed land belongs to defendant 1. She entered into an agreement Ex. 1 with the plaintiff on 7th October 1956 to sell the disputed land for Rs. 10,000/ -. Rs. 1000/-was paid as earnest money on the date of the execution of Ex. 1. There was a stipulation that the balance consideration would be paid by 30th October 1956 at the office of the Sub- Registrar, Balasore when the sale would be completed and that the vendor shall, on completion of the sale, deliver to the purchaser an abstract of her title to the property. Possession was also to be delivered on that day. Further terms of agreement are not relevant and need not be mentioned. On the 24th October 1956 the plaintiff was served with a notice (Ex. 2) from the Collector of Balasore prohibiting it from enclosing or possessing the disputed land as it was the subject-matter of a proceeding under Section 5 (1) of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act. The number and year of the proceeding was mentioned in the notice itself. The plaintiff was not aware prior to Ex. 1 that the disputed land was






















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