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

1979 Supreme(All) 34

R.R.RASTOGI
Mool Chand – Appellant
Versus
Ram Phool – Respondent


Advocates:
Gyan Prakash, for Appellant; K.B.L. Gaur, for Respondents.

JUDGMENT :- This is defendants second appeal from a decree dated 20-11-67 passed by the 1st Additional Civil Judge Bulandshahr confirming the judgement and decree passed by the 1st Munsif, Bulandshahr, decreeing the suit for specific performance in favour of plaintiff-respondent no. 1.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal briefly stated are that the suit was originally filed by Jagdish Prasad respondent no. 2 on the allegations that the defendant-appellant Mool Chand had executed an agreement to sell his land in his favour for a sum of Rs. 4,200/- and had received Rs. 900/- as advance. An agreement was duly executed on 1-10-1965. The sale deed was to be executed by 2-12-1965. Since the defendant-appellant failed to execute the sale deed, Jagdish Prasad filed a suit for specific performance on 6-12-1965. By means of an amendment application moved on 30-4-1966 it was alleged by Jagdish Prasad that he was Benamidar of Ram Phool who is now plaintiff-respondent no. 1 and that it was Ram Phool who was the real purchaser of the disputed property. For that, there was an agreement executed between Jagdish Prasad and Ram Phool on 15-4-1966. The relief for specific performance was hence pra














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