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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 19727

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mrs.Justice S.SRIMATHY
DEVAKUMARAN – Appellant
Versus
A.S. MANIYAN(Died) – Respondent


JUDGMENT

The plaintiff is the appellant herein. The suit is filed for specific performance.

After perusing the documents and the pleadings, the Trial Court had dismissed the suit. Aggrieved over the same, the present appeal is preferred by the plaintiff.

2. The date of sale agreement is 05.04.2003 and the time fixed to conclude the contract is one year. But the parties have not concluded the contract. The plaintiff had not taken any steps to show his readiness and willingness to conclude the contract within a period of one year which would lapse on 04.04.2004. But a suit notice was issued on 05.11.2005, which is more than one year seven months from 04.04.2004 (the date which the parties have agreed to conclude the contract). After the issuance of suit notice the plaintiff had not filed the suit within reasonable time, but had filed the suit on 04.06.2007 which is again after one year seven months. The time line would clearly show that the plaintiff is not ready to conclude the contract and also not inclined to prosecute the case.

3. The contention of the plaintiff is that even though the agreement was entered into on 05.04.2003, subsequently, he had made payment of Rs.5,00,000/- on

25.

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