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

PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR
N. Nagaraj – Appellant
Versus
A. S. Prabhakar – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:P.H. Ramalingam, Advocate
For the Respondent:Arun Bhat, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Pradeep D. Waingankar, J.—Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 17.9.2010 in O.S.No.16610/2003 on the file of XXVII Addl. City Civil Judge sitting at Mayohall Unit, Bangalore, This appeal is preferred by the appellant-plaintiff.

2. The appellant-plaintiff and respondent-defendant entered into a sale agreement dated 19.5.2003, whereby the defendant agreed to sell the schedule property in favour of the plaintiff for a total consideration of Rs.12.00 lakhs. In pursuance of the sale agreement, defendant received a sum of Rs.3,43,653/- from the plaintiff. The balance amount was to be paid at the time of registration of the sale deed. It is stated in the plaint that the plaintiff was ever ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and to get the sale deed registered, but the defendant did not come forward to execute the sale deed. As such, the plaintiff by issuance of a legal notice as per Ex-P6 called upon the defendant to execute the sale deed by expressing his readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract. But the defendant declined to execute the sale deed. As such, the plaintiff filed a suit for a decree of specific performance of the contract



















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