Advanced Search Results

G. Rosaiah Vs. C. Balarami Reddy and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 16

Reported in : AIR1989AP179

P. W. 4 is the attestor. P.Ws 5 and 6 are the alleged neighbours of the plaint schedule property. The appellant examined himself as D.W . 1 and examined D. W. 4, his wife and D. Ws … Thereon, he informed the respondent that he was not willing for the exchange and thereby he rescinded the contract; he has been continuing in possession of his lands and denied delivery of possession of the same to

S.K. Kochar Vs. Nimmi Singh and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 20 and 21; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 6, Rule 1 - Order 22, Rule 1 - Order 23, Rule (4); Contract Act, 1872; Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - Sections 31

Reported in : 1997VAD(Delhi)213; 68(1977)DLT914

first defendant and he died pending the suit The third defendant M/s Mahender Jain & Company was a property broker who was set ex parte. The fourth defendant, the Under Secretary, Land & Buildings Department, Delhi Administration, … the following reliefs:(A)direct/make the defendants I and 2 to fulfilll/complete the specific performance of their part of the contract i.e. in terms of the 'Agreement to sell' (Annexure 'A') enter and execute/register sale deed of the said

Shaik Mahaboob Sahab Vs. K. Nageswara Rao

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Limitation Act - Sections 10 and 20; Specific Relief Act - Sections 16 and 22

Reported in : AIR2008AP55; 2008(2)ALD624; 2008(3)ALT144

and Rs.500/- was to be paid, on or before 10.10.1981. The appellant pleaded that the possession of the property was delivered under the agreement, and that he spent considerable amount, to bring it under the cultivation as … 25.10.1983, and a reply dated 29.10.1983. He expressed his readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract. According to him, time was not the essence of the contract.2. The respondent filed a written statement, denying

Uttam Chand Vs. Smt. Radhabai

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 8; Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 4; Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 18, 20 and 28

Reported in : AIR1991MP296

had monetary transactions with some people and she had litigation in respect to those transactions and her landed property. Her husband was given authority for among others to realise her dues from any person. That earlier she … The defendant ought to have mentioned the amount he had received as principal and the rate of interest contracted; and that even in the evidence given by him and his witness there were discrepancies in that regard.

S.K. Parthasarathy Naidu and Another Vs. K. Rama Naidu and 7 Others

Court : Chennai

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 38; Partnership Act, 1932 - Sections 4, 6, 14, 18, 19, 20 and 69; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 100 - Order 6, Rule 2 - Order 7, Rule 7; Trust Act - Sections 88

Reported in : AIR2001Mad399; (2001)2MLJ779

the appellant in S.A.No.1311 of 2000 for injunction restraining the first respondent Rama Naidu from alienating the suit property and for other reliefs. The suit was dismissed and so was the appeal A.S.No.108 of 1999 and therefore, … Prasad, where the Supreme Court held as follows:' Thus, where in a suit for specific performance of a contract in part performance of which the plaintiff alleges to have paid the defendant some money, the defendant denies

Mamidi Jagannadham Vs. Yelgani Shankaraiah

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 20 and 53A; Specific Relief Act

Reported in : 2008(1)ALD1; 2008(1)ALT94

wherein it was mentioned that the plaintiff paid Rs. 1,500/- towards earnest money and the possession of the property was delivered by the defendant to the plaintiff on the same day in part performance of the contract

Anusaya Wd/O Purushottam Patil Vs. Shobha W/O Govindrao Tembhare and a ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : PropertyContract

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 6, Rule 17 - Order 22, Rule 4; Constitution of India - Article 227

Reported in : 2008(3)ALLMR739; 2008(3)MhLj423

it was not in position to evaluate the market price and half share of Shobha in the suit property and, therefore, it ordered refund of 50% only of total amount paid by appellant-plaintiff to Subhadrabai. Advocate Hedaoo … following substantial question of law:Whether the Appellate Court was justified in reversing the decree for specific performance of contract solely on the ground that one of the legal heirs of deceased Subhadrabai was not brought on record

Ram Gulam and anr. Vs. Government of U.P.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : ContractProperty

Acts : Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 148; Government of India Act, 1935 - Sections 176

Reported in : AIR1950All206

plaintiffs. They were recovered from another house, on a search made by the police and seized as stolen property, in exercise of powers conferred in that behalf by the Code of Criminal Procedure. They were produced as … ground is manifestly untenable and does not deserve any serious consideration, for the obligation of a bailee is contractual obligation and springs only from the contract of bailment. It cannot arise independently of a contract. In this

Ameer Mohammed Vs. Barkat Ali

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : ContractProperty

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 96 - Order 6, Rule 2; Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 20; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 45

Reported in : RLW2003(4)Raj2354; 2002(4)WLC425; 2002(5)WLN604

Rs. 5120/-. The remaining amount of Rs. 3840/- was adjusted towards the payment of sale consideration of the property in dispute. According to the plaintiff, in view of the above facts till 6-10-81 the defendant received total … 47/83 (189/84) by which the trial Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff-respondent for specific performance of the contract dated 9-10-89.2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff alleged in the plaint that the defendant

Burjorji Dhunjibhai Contractor Vs. Jamshed K. Irani

Court : Mumbai

Subject : PropertyContract

Reported in : AIR1914Bom288; (1913)15BOMLR405; 20Ind.Cas.469

a decree for specific performance passed by Mr. Justice Macleod at the instance of a purchaser of immoveable property.2. The contract for sale was made on the 8th of July 1911 in the Gujarati language. The subject-matter