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

1975 Supreme(All) 428

GOPINATH
V. E. Tressler – Appellant
Versus
Jagdish Prasad Agrawal – Respondent


Advocates:
G.C. Bhattacharya, for Appellant; N.B Nigam and B.N. Agrawal, for Respondent.

JUDGMENT:- This is a judgment-debtor's execution second appeal. One Mr. E. C. Ray sold a specified half share in house No. 343 to the appellant who it appears was occupying the same earlier. By a separate agreement entered into on the same date, the appellant agreed to reconvey the property to the vendor after five years. On 19-4-1966, the right of reconveyance was transferred to Jagdish Prasad Agrawal the respondent, in the instant appeal. Jagdish Prasad Agrawal filed a suit No. 770 of 1966 against the appellant for specific performance of the agreement of reconveyance and for proprietary possession over the half share. The suit was decreed on the basis of a compromise. Under the compromise decree, the appellant bound himself to execute a sale deed of the property in dispute as envisaged by reconveyance agreement. He further agreed to deliver possession of the property after a specified time. Execution was sought of the decree by dispossession of the appellant, as he had failed to deliver possession as agreed.

2. The appellant filed objections under Section 47, C.P.C. The objections were:

(1) that the compromise decree was beyond the scope of the suit as actual possession was not de










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