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

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 736

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
K.SUJANA
Madala Ramadevi – Appellant
Versus
Made China Kotaiah – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Madala Ramadevi
For the Respondent: Made China Kotaiah

JUDGMENT :

(K. SUJANA, J.)

Challenging the judgment dated 24.01.2015 passed in O.S.No.259 of 2008 by the learned XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar, the present appeal suit is filed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a suit under Order VII Rule 1 read with Section 26 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE seeking specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 14.05.2007. As per the plaintiff, defendant No.1, M. Chenna Kotaiah, was the absolute owner of the suit property located at Thattianaram Village, Ranga Reddy District, and entered into a sale agreement with the plaintiff for a total consideration of Rs.15,00,000/-, out of which Rs.14,00,000/- was allegedly paid as advance. The plaintiff claimed that despite readiness and willingness to pay the balance, the defendant failed to complete the sale and instead executed a subsequent sale agreement-cum-GPA on 17.01.2008 in favor of defendants 2 and 3. Defendant No.1 remained ex parte. Defendant Nos.2 and 3, however, denied the claims of the plaintiff before the trial Court and asserted that the defendant No.1 agreed to sell the property to them for Rs.18,70,000/-. They ente

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