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

2021 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 2666

CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
*Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Vimla Singh Kapoor, JJ.
Chandan Tripathi v. Neelima Pandey


1. Heard.
This appeal is directed against impugned judgment and decree dated 22.08.2015 passed by the Sixth Additional District Judge, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No.6A of 2013, by which, appellant's prayer for decree of specific performance of contract has been partly allowed.

2. The appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for grant of decree of specific performance on the pleadings, inter alia, that the defendant had entered into an agreement of sale on 26.03 2010 (Ex P/1) with the plaintiff for sale of 2 parcels of land, one situated in Kh. No.725/15 admeasuring 2028 sq.ft. and the other situated in adjoining Khasra. No.725/13 admeasuring 1934 sq.ft. An advance of Rs.5,00,000/- was also paid to the defendant and it was clearly agreed to between the parties that whatever actual extent of land is found on the spot, in possession of the defendant, would be sold by defendant to the plaintiff @ 900 per sq.ft. Further case of the plaintiff was that under the agreement, it was implicit that the defendant would get demarcation of the land done and thereafter, he will inform the plaintiff but this was not done and later on, when despite notice given to the defendant for execution of sale deed by recei

























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