Smt. Shailaja Madhukar Pitre vs Sr. Purushottam Nasik Deshmukh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

APPELLATE SIDE,BOMBAY
A. M. DHAVALE, J
Smt. Shailaja Madhukar Pitre – Appellant
Versus
Sr. Purushottam Nasik Deshmukh – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. K. S. Dewal I/by Jayesh Joshi

Table of Content
1. the appeal seeks specific performance reflecting readiness and willingness. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. unexplained delay impacts the readiness and willingness to perform. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. judicial discretion requires reasonableness in delays. (Para 10 , 11 , 14)
4. final ruling affirms dismissal of appeal due to lack of performance readiness. (Para 12 , 13 , 15)

JUDGMENT :

1. This second appeal is by the original plaintiff. Heard learned advocate for appellant. Regular Suit No. 664 of 2003 was decreed by Civil Judge, J.D. Bhivandi on 27th August, 2008 and she was called upon to deposit remaining amount and the defendant was called upon to execute sale-deed within two months. In the first appeal No. 135/2008 learned District Judge, Thane converted the decree of specific performance into money decree and the defendant was directed to refund consideration amount to the plaintiff. Hence, this appeal.

2. The judgment and arguments disclose following facts;

2.1) By agreement dated 13.01.1984, the defendant agreed to sale the suit land admeasuirng 02 H. 37 R. at the rate of 7,000/- per Acre and received Rs.1001/- on 31.12.1983 and Rs.20,000/- on the date of agreement.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

APPELLATE SIDE,BOMBAYA. M. DHAVALE, JSmt. Shailaja Madhukar Pitre – AppellantVersusSr. Purushottam Nasik Deshmukh – Respondent

APPELLATE SIDE,BOMBAY
A. M. DHAVALE, J
Smt. Shailaja Madhukar Pitre – Appellant
Versus
Sr. Purushottam Nasik Deshmukh – Respondent