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

1934 Supreme(Lah) 646

BHIDE
Buta Ram – Appellant
Versus
Sayyad Mohammad – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Bhide, J. - This was a suit for recovery of Rs. 60,000 on the basis of a mortgage deed, by the sale of certain land situate at Mauza Bahrampur, or in the alternative for specific performance of the contract on the part of the defendant Buta Ram to sell two-third share in 2111 kanals, 15 marlas of land situated at Mauza Bohar as provided for in the deed and also for Rs. 21,600 as damages on account of the breach of contract. The learned Judge of the trial Court has granted the first relief to the plaintiff but disallowed damages for the alleged breach of the contract to sell land on the ground that the plaintiff was not ready to perform his part in respect of the contract. From this decision the defendant has preferred the present appeal to this Court. The material conditions of the mortgage deed on which the plaintiff's suit was based were as follows:

1. I (i.e. the mortgagor) will remain in possession of the aforesaid mortgaged land, but will not in any way transfer the said land to any other person till payment of the entire aforesaid mortgage money. 2. I have agreed to sell to the mortgagee in lieu of Rs. 60,000 (rupees sixty thousand) two-third share of the entire land,

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