V. Govindan v. v. Palaniammal
Case brief
What is this about?
Revision petition allowed. Specific performance decree maintained. Impugned order dismissing delay condonation set aside. Petitioner permitted to deposit balance consideration within one month due to valid reasons for delay.
What did the court decide?
Impugned order set aside; application allowed; petitioner permitted to deposit balance consideration within one month. No costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 21.10.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
CRP.No.1374 of 2020
V.Govindan,
S/o.Venkatachalam, Residing at Door No.4/116, Chinnanoor Post, Sukkampatty (via), Salem – 636 122. ...Petitioner
.Vs.
V.Palaniammal, D/o.Venkatachalam, Residing at Chinnanoor Post, Sukkampatty (via), Salem – 636 122. ...Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Revision petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India against the order and decreetal order dated 04.02.2020 in I.A.No.01/2019 in O.S.No.458/2016 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge at Salem.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Karunakaran
For Respondent : No Appearance
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a petitioner should be denied specific performance due to delay in depositing balance consideration caused by belief that a setting aside petition was pending.
Whether the impugned order dismissing the condonation of delay petition should be set aside.
Whether the petitioner can be permitted to deposit balance sale consideration within a reasonable time.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
V. Govindan
- respondent
V. Palaniammal
Coram
G. ChandrasedhARAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court