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

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma
SMT.PRATIBHA – Appellant
Versus
TEJ KUMAR BAJAJ – Respondent


CAV JUDGMENT

1) This appeal is preferred under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment/decree dated 6-8-2005 passed by 3rd Additional District Judge, Raipur (CG) in Civil Suit No.20-A/2005 wherein the said court decreed the suit filed by the respondent for specific performance of contract for land bearing Survey No. 395/1 area 0.114 hectares, situated at village Tikrapara, Tahsil and Distt. Raipur (CG).

2) Both sides entered into agreement for sale of land in question vide agreement dated 7-8-2003. The amount of consideration was Rs.4,00,000/- and the appellant received Rs.1,17,000/- as advance upto 2-10-2003. Despite notice issued by the respondent, appellant did not execute the sale deed that is why suit was filed which was decreed as mentioned above.

3) Learned counsel for the appellant would submit as under:

i) There was no stipulation in the contract regarding demarcation of the land. The trial Court erred in deciding that time was not essence of the contract.

ii) When respondent had not paid balance amount within one month from the date of contract he was not entitled to obtain decree for specific performance.

iii) The respondent was short of money and

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