Daggubati Hari Prasad Rao, Prakasam Dist and Anr. Vs Daggubati Sita Ramanjaneyulu, Prakasam Dist

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1191 of 2017

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent.

The petitioners-defendants filed this civil revision petition challenging the order, dated 28.11.2016, passed by the Principal District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District in dismissing I.A.No.1234 of 2016 filed for issuance of a direction to the respondent-plaintiff to deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs.15,72,380/- in O.S.No.133 of 2016 filed for specific performance of agreement of sale.

¶5

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are willing to execute the sale deed, provided the respondent-plaintiff deposits the balance sale consideration. There is no dispute with regard to the amount of balance sale consideration.

¶6

In view of the above, there is no need to adjudicate the present civil revision petition and it is accordingly closed. However, the trial Court is directed to advance the hearing of the suit and fix a particular date for payment of balance sale consideration by the respondent-plaintiff and execution of the sale

¶7

2

¶8

deed by the petitioners-defendants before the Sub-Registrar concerned and on reporting the said action, the suit itself can be closed on the next date of hearing.

¶9

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this civil revision petition shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶10

________________________ .RAMALINGESWARA RAO,J

¶11

Dt:08.09.2017

¶12

kdl

Daggubati Hari Prasad Rao, Prakasam Dist and Anr. v. Daggubati Sita Ramanjaneyulu, Prakasam Dist

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daggubati Hari Prasad Rao, Prakasam Dist and Anr. v. Daggubati Sita Ramanjaneyulu, Prakasam Dist

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Case details

Similar cases

Maaniya Biotech Vs The State of Telengana

M/s. Tillage Biotec Private Limited. Vs The Commissioner and Director of Agriculture

Indian Crop Care, Vs The Commissioner and Director of Agriculture

M/s.N.Veeraiah Firm, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Masthan Bee, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Adepu Prameela W/ o a.Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana rep by its Principal Secretary