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

2020 Supreme(P&H) 1843

RAJBIR SEHRAWAT
Arun Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Kamal Sharma – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Gaurav Tyagi

ORDER :

Rajbir Sehrawat, J.

1. This regular second appeal is filed by the plaintiff challenging the concurrent finding recorded by the courts below, whereby the suit for specific performance of an agreement, filed by the plaintiff, was dismissed. For the convenience, the parties are being referred to herein as plaintiff and the defendant; as they were described in the original suit.

2. The fact in brief, as mentioned in the judgment of the lower appellate court are; that the plaintiff/appellant herein had filed a suit for specific performance claiming that the vendor Mukesh Chand son of Roop Chand had executed an agreement to sell dated 07.05.2007 in favour of the plaintiff qua the sale of portion of his share in house No. 475/1, Ward No. 3, Mahavirpura, New Railway Road, Guru-gram, for an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- and the possession of the same was also handed over to him. The entire amount of consideration was paid to the vendor. But, the vendor expired. Thereafter, the legal notice was served upon the legal heirs of the vendor Mukesh Chand. But, they refused to execute the sale deed. Accordingly the suit was filed.

3. The parties led their respective evidence. After considering the e

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