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

H. P. SANDESH
Bylamurthy – Appellant
Versus
M. G. Gangalakshmamma – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Sri D.L. Jagadeesh, Senior Counsel for Sri G. Chandrashekharaiah, Advocate

JUDGMENT

This matter is listed for admission and heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This second appeal is filed against the concurrent finding in rejecting prayer of specific performance.

3. The factual matrix of case of plaintiff before the Trial Court that there was an agreement of sale and the same came to be executed by father of defendant on 05.02.2003 and sale consideration of Rs.8,65,000/- and sale consideration of Rs.4,00,000/- was paid. Subsequently an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was also paid on 21.07.2004. It is also the case that only father has acquired the property vide sale deed dated 11.10.1990 and the same is absolute property of father of the defendant and the said Gangarangaiah died leaving behind defendant who succeed estate including the suit property in question and hence the defendants are bound to execute the sale deed after receiving balance sale consideration and inspite of that they did not come forward to execute the sale deed and hence issued notice on 17.06.2008 and untenable reply was given by the defendants. Hence, the plaintiff filed the suit for relief of specific performance.

4. In pursuance of

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