Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. SATHISH NINAN, P. KRISHNA KUMAR, JJ
KARAKUNNATH MAHAMOOD – Appellant
Versus
THOVARAYI BABU – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. specific performance agreement details (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. defendants' defenses and responses (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. hearing and key determination points (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. analysis of readiness and willingness (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. improper conduct affecting equitable relief (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 6. conclusion on appeals and relief granted (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
JUDGMENT
Sathish Ninan, J.
These appeals arise from the decree in a suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale. The suit was decreed by the trial court. RFA 428/2019 is filed by the 4thdefendant, RFA 219/2025 is filed by the third defendant, and RFA 220 of 2025 is filed by defendants 1 and 2.
2. The plaintiffs are brothers. The second defendant is the wife of the first defendant. The third defendant is the brother of the first defendant. The fourth defendant is the alienee of the plaint schedule properties.
3. On 27.04.2007, the first defendant, on his behalf and on behalf of defendants 2 and 3, entered into Ext.A1 agreement for sale with the first plaintiff. Under Ext.A1, the plaint schedule properties, four in number, were agreed to be conveyed by
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
