Jacob v. Narayanan
Case brief
What is this about?
In an appeal against a decree rejecting specific performance of a sale agreement, the Court held that specific relief was not granted due to lack of evidence for tender. The Court modified the judgment to order the return of the advance amount with interest, allowing the appeal partly.
What did the court decide?
Decree passed for return of Rs. 10,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from date of suit and 12% p.a. thereafter, to be charged on property assets.
What the court decided
RFA NO. 62 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 15TH POUSHA, 1943
RFA NO. 62 OF 2021
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26/7/2016 IN OS 184/2012
OF SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA
APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:
JACOB, AGED 64 YEARS,
S/O. LATE G. PAPPAN, OTTUPARAMBIL, KUTTAMPEROOR
MURI, MANNAR.
BY ADV A.SHAFEEK (KAYAMKULAM)
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:
NARAYANAN, AGED 64 YEARS,
S/O. KARUTHAKUNJU, KOTTAYI KIZHAKKATTIL, ERAMATHOOR
MURI, THRIPPERUMTHURA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA – 690105.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the decree rejecting specific performance of the sale agreement can be interfered with given the defect in evidence of tender.
Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the earlier suit for injunction under Order II Rule 2 CPC barring a subsequent suit for substantial relief.
Whether the advance amount received under the agreement is liable to be returned with interest.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Jacob
- respondent
Narayanan
Coram
P. Somarajan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court