Shri. Yusufkhan Kamruddin Khatib v. Shri. Fatthekhan Ghudulal Bhaldar and Anr.

Bombay HC11 Dec 2024SA/129/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeal admitted on five substantial questions of law concerning execution of a registered agreement for sale and refusal of specific performance by both courts below. Notice to respondents issued, record called for. Interim relief rule made returnable with ad-interim relief granted.

What did the court decide?

Appeal admitted on five substantial questions of law; notice issued; ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c) till next date.

Shri. Yusufkhan Kamruddin Khatib vs Shri. Fatthekhan… — Specific Performance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

34-SA-129-2024.docx

¶2

rrpillai

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

SECOND APPEAL NO. 129 OF 2024

¶5

WITH

¶6

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 28 OF 2024

¶7

Shri Yusufkhan Kamruddin Khatib … Appellants/Applicants and Another Vs. Shri Fatthekhan Ghudulal Bhaldar … Respondents and Another

¶8

Mr. Padmanabh D. Pise a/w. Mr. Sejal A. Hariyan for the Appellant/Applicant.

¶9

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J.

¶10

DATE : 11^th DECEMBER 2024

¶11

ORDER :

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the appellants. The second appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law :

¶13

(i) Whether the findings recorded by both the courts on execution of the suit agreement amounts to incorrect appreciation of the pleadings and evidence on record ?

¶14

Digitally signed RAJESHWARI by RAJESHWARIRAMESH PILLAI RAMESH PILLAI Date:2024.12.13 16:56:12 +0200

¶15

1/3

¶16

34-SA-129-2024.docx

¶17

(ii) Whether both the courts erred in not accepting the execution of the suit agreement as an agreement for sale by ignoring that the suit document was a registered document supported by plaintiffs oral evidence including examining attesting witness ?

¶18

(iii) Whether both the courts erred in not taking into consideration that the evidence led by the plaintiffs was not rebutted by the defendants by cross examination and by leading any evidence on behalf of the defendants ?

¶19

(iv) Whether both courts erred in not taking into consideration the compromise pursis at Exhibit 72 which supports the plaintiffs contention on execution of the agreement for sale and the terms and conditions agreed between the parties ?

¶20

(v) Whether the reasons recorded by both the courts in refusing to grant specific performance would be sustainable in view of not recording any findings on the other issues with respect to readiness and willingness and on the binding effect of the execution of the sale deed in favour of defendant no.2 during

¶21

the subsistence of the agreement in favour of the plaintiffs ?

¶22

2/3

¶23

34-SA-129-2024.docx

¶24

In addition to court notice, learned Advocate for the appellants to

¶25

serve the respondents by private service and file service affidavit.

¶26

Call for record and proceedings.

¶27

Printing is dispensed with.

¶28

Learned Advocate for the appellants shall file private paper book within one year from today.

¶29

Civil Application No. 28 of 2024

¶30

Though application is listed on board, office has not placed on record copy of the application. Copy of the application tendered by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶31

Rule on interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c) is made returnable on 5^th March 2025.

¶32

In addition to court notice, learned Advocate for the applicants to serve the respondents by private service and file service affidavit before the next date.

¶33

Till the next date there will be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c).

¶34

[GAURI GODSE, J.]

¶35

3/3

Shri. Yusufkhan Kamruddin Khatib v. Shri. Fatthekhan Ghudulal Bhaldar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Yusufkhan Kamruddin Khatib v. Shri. Fatthekhan Ghudulal Bhaldar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kulbhushan Bhimrao Udgave and Ors. vs Sunil Shantinath Udgave and Ors.

Pravin Shrirang Khandare vs Nandini Urf Nanda Pravin Khandare

Dnyaneshwar Shivling Mane and Ors. vs the Chief Administrative Officer Zhila Parishad Solapur and Ors.

Shri. Shriram Jayajirao Jamdar and Anr. vs the Commissioner Pune Municipal Corporation Shivajinagar, Pune and Anr.

Sultasaheb Hasensaheb Patvegar Since Deceased Thr L Rs vs Aubai Akubai Gundu Jadhav Since Deceased Thr L Rs

Mr. Gvsn Balkrishna and Another vs M/S. Divine Properties Thr. Its Partner Mr. Ishwar Ramjibhai Patel and Others