JAYA SEN Vs. SUJIT KUMAR SARKAR
LAWS(CAL)-1997-9-16
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on September 26,1997

JAYA SEN Appellant
VERSUS
SUJIT KR.SARKAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

SATYABRATA SINHA, J. - (1.) The question as to whether the petitioner is entitled to interest on the amount directed to be paid by the defendant (Purchaser) to the plaintiff (Vendor) by way of consideration for execution of a deed of sale or not is the question involved in this application.
(2.) The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit against the defendant-appellant claiming, inter alia, the following reliefs :- "(a) A decree for recovery of possession of the suit premises and delivery of khas possession of the suit premises and delivery of khas possession thereof to the plaintiff after evicting the defendants therefrom;(b) Alternatively a decree for specific performance of the contract directing the defendant No. 1 to pay the balance consideration of Rs. 2,34,000/- to the plaintiff and get a deed of conveyance executed and registered by the plaintiff at her own costs;(c) A decree for damages tentatively @ Rs. 50,000/- for wrongful use and occupation from 19-2-88 till the filing of the suit and further damages till recovery of possession, by adjustment of the amount with advances, alternatively for damages for breach of contract for Rs. 50,000/-."
(3.) The admitted fact of the matter is as follows :- The plaintiff-respondent entered into an agreement for sale of June, 1996 for purchase of the flat on the first floor of the eastern side of the premises No. 1/1Z/1, Gariahat Road, Calcutta-68 for a consideration of Rs. 3,25,000/-. The appellant initially paid a sum of Rs. 10,000/- and later on paid several amounts totalling Rs. 91,000/- for which a receipt was granted to him by the plaintiff. The said agreement for sale was an oral one. Admittedly there existed a dispute by and between the plaintiff and the defendant as to whether a garage was also the subject-matter of the aforesaid transaction or not. The respondent had put the appellant in possession of the aforementioned premises in part performance of the contract. As despite the same the balance consideration amount was not paid by the appellant, the plaintiff filed the aforementioned suit.;


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