Sandeep v. Suresh
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court allowed the appeal partly. It upheld the trial court's dismissal of the suit for specific performance due to lack of readiness by the plaintiff and inability to ascertain property extent, but re-fixed interest on the refundable advance at 10% per annum.
What did the court decide?
Appeal allowed in part; interest on advance sale consideration re-fixed at 10% per annum; trial court decree affirmed in all other respects.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 29TH SRAVANA, 1941
RFA.No.864 OF 2011
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OS 1045/2010 DATED 28-11-2011 OF I ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR
APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:
SANDHEEP, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, “SREE KRISHNA”, MALESSAMANGALAM DESOM, THIRUVILAMALA VILLAGE, TALAPALLY TALUK, TRICHUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS. SRI.N.SUBRAMANIAM SRI.M.S.NARAYANAN
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:
SURESH, S/O.KRISHNA MURTHY, PARVATHI NILAYAM, THIRUVILAMALA DESOM AND VILLAGE, TALAPALLY TALUK, TRICHUR DISTRICT 680001.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant plaintiff proved continued readiness and willingness to perform the contract till the date of hearing.
Whether the extent of the property to be conveyed could be ascertained.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
SANDHEEP
- respondent
SURESH
Coram
SATHISH NINAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court