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

2018 Supreme(P&H) 1218

ANIL KSHETARPAL
Mangal – Appellant
Versus
Sube Singh (since deceased) throuhg LRs. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Randhir Singh Hooda, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Virender Rana, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

These two appeals filed by the defendant-appellant are arising from the separate suits for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell which have been decided by separate judgments. However, since the issue which needs determination is common, therefore, counsel for the parties are agreed that these appeals can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment.

2. In Regular Second Appeal No.1516 of 2013, learned trial court dismissed the suit, whereas the learned first appellate court has reversed the judgment. Whereas in Regular Second Appeal No.1588 of 2012, defendant-appellant is in the regular second appeal against the concurrent findings of fact.

3. Plaintiff propounds two agreement to sell dated 19.01.2006, executed by the defendant-appellant. One is with respect to land measuring 14 kanals and 5 marlas for a total sale consideration of Rs.24,04,688/- and earnest money of Rs.2,40,000/- was paid. In the other case, agreement to sell is with respect to land measuring 2 kanals and 6 marlas for a total sale consideration of Rs.13,50,000/- and earnest money of Rs.38,000/- was paid.

4. As per agreement to sell between the parties, th















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