NITAI MUDOK S/O LATE GOPAL MUDOK Vs. SUREN SAIKIA @ SURENDRA SAIKIA AND 4 ORS
LAWS(GAU)-2018-7-119
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on July 11,2018

Nitai Mudok S/O Late Gopal Mudok Appellant
VERSUS
Suren Saikia @ Surendra Saikia And 4 Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Kalyan Rai Surana, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. S. K. Sarkar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1, 3, 4 and 5.
(2.) This appeal under Section 100 CPC, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 26.02.2016 passed by the learned District Judge, Nagaon in Title Appeal No. 20/2014, thereby dismissing the said appeal, and affirming the judgment and decree dated 03.05.2014, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Nagaon in Title Suit No. 8/2008.
(3.) The appellant is the plaintiff in Title suit No. 8/2008 which was filed on 04.04.2008. The case projected by the appellant in the plaint is that he had entered into an agreement for sale with the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 on 04.02.2006 (Ext. 1), thereby agreeing to purchase two plots of land one measuring 3K- 6L( 3 katha-6 lecha) and the other plot measuring 1B-2K-16L (1 bigha-2 katha-16 lecha) from the said respondents at a sale consideration of Rs.3,30,000/-. It is projected that by payments made on various dates, a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- was paid by the appellant to the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 against the agreed sale consideration of Rs.3,30,000/-, further projecting that the balance amount of Rs.30,000/- was required to be paid at the time of registration of the Sale Deed. It was projected that on 10.01.2008, the said respondents did not turn up to execute the sale deed in respect of the land measuring 3K-6L and later on, the appellant had come to know that the respondent No. 1 had sold 1K land to the respondent No. 4 at a sale consideration of Rs.60,000/- and that the respondent No. 3 had sold 1K land to the respondent No. 5 at a sale consideration of Rs.70,000/-. Hence, the suit was filed for specific purpose of contract. From the documents annexed to the memo of appeal, it appears that as per order dated 20.04.2010, the original schedule of the plaint was amended and first plot of land measuring 3K-16L was deleted and the suit had been contested in respect of the second plot of land measuring 1B-2K-16L out of 2B-2K-17L land covered by Dag No. 831/832.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.