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

2002 Supreme(SC) 121

BRIJESH KUMAR, R.C.LAHOTI
P. Purushottam Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Pratap Steels LTD. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

R.C. Lahoti, J.-Leave granted.

2. An introductory statement of bare necessary facts would suffice for the purpose of this order. On 31-10-1987, a contract for sale of immoveable property was entered into between the parties whereby the appellant agreed to sell the suit property consisting of a building and the site on which the building stands, for a consideration of Rs. 40,25,000/-. An amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- was paid by way of advance or earnest money the balance consideration of Rs. 32,25,000/- was to be paid simultaneously with the execution and registration of sale deed. This contract was in supersession of an earlier contract dated 22-9-1986 which had lapsed. The vendor had agreed to obtain the requisite permission from the Urban Land Ceiling Authority before 30th June, 1988. The time so appointed could be estended by mutual consent of the parties. It was expressly agreed upon between the parties that if the requisite exemption or permission under the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976 ( ULCRA for short) was not forthcoming by 30th June, 1988 or within such extended period as may be mutually agreed to, then the contract was to become inoperative and unenforce




























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