KRISHNAJI BABAJI HAVAL Vs. SANGAPPA MURIGAPPA WANGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts which have given rise to this Krishnaji appeal are briefly these. On October 20, 1918, the present defendants Nos. 3 and 4 agreed to sell the house in question to the present plaintiff for Rs. 850. On October 25, 1918, they in fact sold it to the present defendant No 1 for Rs. 900. The plaintiff filed Suit No. 358 of 1918 against the present defendant No. 1 and present defendants Nos. 3 and 4 for specific performance and damages arising out of the breach of the said contract dated October 20, 1918. It appears that the plaintiff made a claim for possession of the property also. The judgment in that suit shows that the principal point raised was whether defendant No 1 had notice of the contract between the plaintiff and the owners of the house. It was found that defendant No. 1 bought from the owners with notice of the previous contract with the plaintiff and in the result the following decree was passed :-" On payment of Rs. 825 by plaintiff, defendant No. 3 must execute a conveyance of the suit shop to plaintiff."

(2.) We are informed that there was an appeal from this judgment, and there was also a second appeal, but the proceedings relating to the appeal and the second appeal have not been put in, and it may be taken that the decree passed in the suit, to which we have referred, was affirmed.

(3.) Apparently after this the plaintiff obtained possession of a part of the shop in question, and the present suit was filed by the plaintiff in December 1920 for possession of the rest of the shop from defendant No. 1, who was in possession, and defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 were joined as parties, defendant No. 2 being a tenant of defendant No. 1, and defendants Nos. 3 and 4 being the original owners of the property.