SHAMSHER SINGH Vs. RAJINDER KUMAR
LAWS(SC)-2014-4-109
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on April 16,2014

SHAMSHER SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
RAJINDER KUMAR Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

A C ARULAPPAN VS. AHALYA NAIK [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

MAL CHAND VS. SHIV KUMAR [LAWS(RAJ)-2017-3-27] [REFERRED TO]
BISAHU SON OF JAGESHWAR SAHU VS. PURUSHOTTAM VAISHNAV [LAWS(CHH)-2015-9-55] [REFERRED]
PARVATHAMMA W/O LATE S BASAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS VS. B SUBRAMANYA SHARMA S/O LATE RAMA SWAMAIAH [LAWS(KAR)-2019-7-410] [REFERRED TO]
REHANA BEGUM VS. C VENKATESHAPPA [LAWS(KAR)-2019-7-97] [REFERRED TO]
K. M. VENKATARAMANA VS. K. SUMITRA [LAWS(KAR)-2021-6-221] [REFERRED TO]
J. VENGATESH AND ORS. VS. MACRO MARVEL PROJECTS LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2019-8-491] [REFERRED TO]
FAROOQUE DADABHOY VS. USHA S BHAT [LAWS(MAD)-2014-6-266] [REFERRED TO]
K. NAGARAJAIAH AND ORS. VS. K.R. DEVI SULOCHANA [LAWS(KAR)-2015-9-236] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)These appeals have been preferred by the appellants (the original defendants) against the common Judgment and final Order dated 17th September, 2012 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in RSA Nos. 2871 & 1543 of 2012. By the said impugned judgment, two separate RSAs filed by the appellants against the common judgment of First Appellate Court were dismissed by the High Court.
(3.)The factual matrix of the case is as follows:
The respondents (original plaintiffs) filed a suit for specific performance against the appellants herein alleging that an agreement to sell dated 3rd June, 2002 was entered between them with respect to the suit land. It was alleged that out of 3,00,000/- (total agreed consideration), 2,00,000/- had already been paid by the plaintiffs on 3rd June, 2002 and as per agreement, the balance amount were to be paid at the time of execution of sale deed, i.e. on 20th December, 2002. It was further alleged that later, the defendant-appellants became dishonest and wanted to sell the land to some other persons. Therefore, they had to file the suit.



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