ANDHRA ASSOCIATION BUILDING TRUST Vs. DEBA PROSAD ROY & OTHERS
LAWS(CAL)-1976-7-47
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on July 14,1976

ANDHRA ASSOCIATION BUILDING TRUST Appellant
VERSUS
DEBA PROSAD ROY And OTHERS Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

TOMLIN V. STANDARD TELEPHONES AND CABLES LTD. [REFERRED TO]
SM. SUMITRA DEBI AGARWALLA V. SM. SULEKHA KUNDU [REFERRED TO]
OFFICIAL TRUSTEE WEST BENGAL VS. SACHINDRA NATH CHATTERJEE [REFERRED TO]
NATHULAL VS. PHOOLCHAND [REFERRED TO]
M L SETHI VS. R P KAPUR [REFERRED TO]
BIMAL KUMARI VS. ASOKE MITRA [REFERRED TO]
SHIB KUMAR BANERJEE VS. RASUL BUX [REFERRED TO]
DEBENDRA NATH CHOWDHURY VS. SOUTHERAN BANK LTD [REFERRED TO]
BENARAS ICE FACTORY LTD VS. SUKHLAL AMARCHAND VADNAGRA [REFERRED TO]
SUBARNARANI MULLICK VS. BEJOY KUMAR DAW [REFERRED TO]
SOURENDRA NATH MITRA VS. TARUBALA DASI [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

R.N. Pyne, J. - (1.)This is the plaintiff's application under Order 23 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recording the agreement and/or compromise between it and the defendants (respondents herein) as recorded in the draft terms of settlement being Annexure 'D' to the petition and for passing a decree in accordance therewith.
(2.)In Sept. 1961 the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as "the petitioner") filed the above suit against the defendants (hereinafter referred to as "the respondents") for specific performance of the agreement in writing dated 24th Nov. 1959. This agreement is for sale of premises No. 148, Rash Behari Avenue (hereinafter referred to as "the said premises") belonging to the respondents to the petitioner. It appears that after the said agreement was entered into a sum of Rs. 10,000.00 was paid by the petitioner to the respondents through their Solicitors Messrs. N.K. Ray & Co. as earnest. It is stated that the respondents failed and neglected to perform their part of the said agreement or to execute a conveyance in respect of the said premises in favour of the petitioner. Hence, the above suit was filed by the petitioner for specific performance of the said agreement. Petitioner's case is that after filing of this suit in or about Nov. 1972 it was wholly settled and/or adjusted by a lawful agreement and/or compromise as recorded in the draft terms of settlement being annexure 'D' to the petition. The petitioner has also relied upon various letters exchanged between the Solicitors of the parties to this suit in support of its case. Copies of the said letters are annexed to the petition.
(3.)Various objections have been taken by the respondents to this application. At the hearing counsel for the respondents submitted that in this application he would also rely upon the points taken in the additional written statement filed by the respondents. Inasmuch as it was not necessary to refer to any new facts for deciding those points parties agreed they would advance their argument on the said points without filing any supplementary affidavit.
;


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