Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V.Karthikeyan, R.Vijayakumar, JJ
V.Sahaya Antony – Appellant
Versus
Vasuki – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant is the plaintiff in the original suit. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. allegations surrounding the agreement and execution process. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's observations regarding ownership and regulatory restrictions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 19) |
| 4. final ruling on specific performance and requirements for execution. (Para 20 , 21) |
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by C.V.Karthikeyan, J.)
The plaintiff in O.S.No.3 of 2012 on the file of the District Court, Kanyakumari at Nagercoil is the appellant herein.
2. O.S.No.3 of 2012 had been filed seeking specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 04.02.2009 entered into between the plaintiff and the first defendant. In the alternate, the plaintiff had also sought that the first plaintiff should be directed to execute a sale deed to an extent of 16 ½ cents and to return back the proportionate amount received by her for 10 cents of land which stood in the name of second defendant/her daughter. By judgment dated 18.12.2017, the suit came to be dismissed, necessitating the plaintiff to file the present appeal.
O.S.No.3/2012 [District Court, Kanyakumari, Nagercoil]:
3. The plaintiff contended that the suit schedule property
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
