High Court of Karnataka Hears Appeals Against Decree for Specific Performance in Suit Involving Subsequent Purchasers. The trial court had decreed specific performance of an agreement to sell agricultural lands, directing the original vendor and later purchasers to execute a joint sale deed.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal arises from a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell agricultural lands. The first defendant, the owner, agreed to sell the suit property to the plaintiff on 05.11.1990 for a total consideration of Rs.3,47,100. The plaintiff claimed to have paid Rs.1,75,000 as advance and was put in possession. The sale was to be completed within thirteen months from the date of the agreement after survey and durast work. The plaintiff alleged he was always ready and willing to perform his part, but the first defendant evaded execution of the sale deed. The first defendant contended that only Rs.75,000 was paid and the agreement was tampered to show a higher amount and to extend the performance period from three to thirteen months. She asserted that the agreement was cancelled and the advance returned after the plaintiff expressed inability to complete the sale. Prior to the suit, the first defendant sold parts of the suit property to the second, third, and fourth defendants under registered sale deeds. The plaintiff impleaded these subsequent purchasers and sought a direction that all defendants execute the sale deed jointly in his favour. The trial court decreed the suit for specific performance. The second defendant and the third and fourth defendants filed separate regular first appeals challenging the decree.

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010631582010_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2013 LawText (KAR) (10) 20

RFA No. 1242/2003 with RFA No. 1312/2003 and Misc. Civil No. 13365/2010

2013-10-11

N. Kumar, V. Suri Appa Rao

Sri Udaya Holla, Sri Dayanand S. Naik, Sri S. Vijayashankar, Sri T. Seshagiri Rao, Sri B.V. Acharya, Sri Chouta

Smt Padmini Raghavan; Smt Lakshmi Thamaiah; Sri V.T. Anand

H.A. Sonnappa (since deceased by LRs Smt. Bhagyamma, Sri Shivkumar, Sri S. Mohan Kumar, Sri Sunil Kumar, Sri S. Srikant Kumar, Sri Anil Kumar, Sri S. Arun Kumar, Smt. Bindu); Smt. Hanumakka (since deceased by LR Ashwathappa); Smt. Lakshmi Thamaiah; Sri V.T. Anand

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Suit for specific performance of agreement of sale of agricultural land.

Remedy Sought

Plaintiff sought decree directing defendants 1, 3 and 4 to execute sale deed jointly in his favour and put him in possession.

Filing Reason

Defendants failed to execute sale deed despite plaintiff's readiness; they sold the property to third parties.

Previous Decisions

Trial Court (II Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Bangalore Rural District) decreed the suit for specific performance on 10.07.2003 in O.S. No. 316/93.

Judgment Excerpts

The subject matter of the suit is agricultural lands bearing Sy.No.108 measuring 7 acres 20 guntas, Sy.No.109 measuring 5 acres 33 guntas, Sy.No.112 measuring 10 acres and Sy.No.113 measuring 5 acres 24 guntas, all situated in Thylagere Village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore District. the first defendant Smt. Hanumakka is the absolute owner of the schedule property. the plaintiff has developed the land by investing huge lot of money i.e., he has raised mango groves and he has also level the entire land by using the bulldozer and also made preparation to fence the entire land for which purpose he has invested lot of money. The first defendant has not disclosed the said alienation made by her in the written statement placed by her in the year 1996.

Procedural History

The plaintiff filed O.S. No. 316/93 in the Court of II Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Bangalore Rural District, for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 05.11.1990. The trial court decreed the suit on 10.07.2003. The second defendant (Smt. Padmini Raghavan) filed RFA No. 1242/2003 and defendants 3 and 4 (Smt. Lakshmi Thamaiah and Sri V.T. Anand) filed RFA No. 1312/2003 against the judgment and decree.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 96, Order XLI Rule 1
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Hears Appeals Against Decree for Specific Performance in Suit Involving Subsequent Purchasers. The trial court had decreed specific performance of an agreement to sell agricultural lands, directing the original vendor and late...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Application for Clarification in AMIE Degree Equivalence Case. Institution of Mechanical Engineers (India) Cannot Claim Its Associate Membership Certificate as Equivalent to a Degree in Engineering Without UGC or AICTE Approva...