Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, R.VIJAYAKUMAR
G.Thangasamy Nadar (died) – Appellant
Versus
D.Rajkumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. defendants owned the property and sold it. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. plaintiff's response to cancellation. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. trial court found plaintiff willing to perform. (Para 10 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. arguments focus on plaintiff's readiness. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. court's examination of evidence. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. appeal dismissed; trial court's decree confirmed. (Para 27 , 28) |
JUDGMENT :
R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.
1. The defendants in a suit for specific performance have preferred the present appeal challenging the decree for specific performance.
(A).Factual Matrix:
2.The defendants are the owners of the suit schedule property. They entered into a sale agreement on 22.08.2016 to alienate the property in favour of the plaintiff. The total sale consideration is Rs.1,01,25,000/-. Rs.5,00,000/- was paid in cash as advance. A cheque for a sum of Rs.22,00,000/- was paid in favour of the defendants for remitting the loan from the State Bank of India. It was agreed that the balance sale consideration of Rs.74,25,000/- was to be paid within a period of three months. In the meantime, the property has to be measured with the help of a Government Surveyor in the presence of t
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
