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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 12398

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr Justice P.B. BALAJI
P.RAMACHANDRA RAJU – Appellant
Versus
M.DHANANJAYA RAJU – Respondent


COMMON JUDGMENT

The defendants 2 to 4, in a suit for specific performance, are the appellants in Second Appeal 875 of 2017. They are also the appellants in S.A. 876 of 2017, having been unsuccessful in their suit seeking a relief of permanent injunction.

2. The parties are described as per their litigative status before the trial Court.

3. The common facts that are material for adjudication in the above Second Appeals are as hereunder:-

3.1. The plaintiff in O.S. No. 9 of 2010 sought for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 20.09.2006. According to the plaintiff, the first defendant offered to sell the suit property for a total sale consideration of Rs.3,39,000/- and a sum of Rs.59,000/- was paid as advance and Rs.2,80,000/- was to be paid as balance sale consideration. The agreement was to be concluded within a period of three months. Pleading that the plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and also that the plaintiff was put in possession pursuant to the sale agreement and the first defendant having promised to bring the defendants 2 to 4 for execution of the sale deed in his favour and not adhering to any of his promises, constraine

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