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

2016 Supreme(P&H) 1733

AMIT RAWAL
Tulli Ram – Appellant
Versus
Fateh Singh @ Fatehbir – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. Nipun Vashist, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

AMIT RAWAL, J.

1. The appellants-defendant Nos.1 & 2 are aggrieved of the judgment and decree of both the Courts below, whereby the suit seeking specific performance of agreement to sell dated 18.09.2000 executed by alleged attorney-holder Gulab Singh, whose attorney cancelled on 03.10.2000, has been decreed while exercising the discretion under Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (hereinafter called 'the 1963 Act').

2. Mr. Amit Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants-defendants submits that the appellants-defendants had executed a General Power of Attorney dated 06.09.2000 in favour of their cousin Gulab Singh, who breached the trust and entered into an agreement to sell dated 20.09.2000 with one Om Parkash. Before the aforementioned act could fructify into sale deed, GPA was cancelled vide cancellation deed dated 03.10.2000, yet the agent exceeded the jurisdiction and executed a sale deed dated 05.10.2000. The aforementioned act of the agent was challenged by filing the suit which was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 29.04.2005. The appellants-defendants was flabbergasted, upon receiving upon summons of the suit seeking specific performan







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