- 1 * IN $55 HIGH CGURT 0? KARNA$gKA_AT B§NGAiQRE' = EATER TRIS THE 4" DAY 5: Jum§'2e¢8. "3W'"J @REsEN$_ THE HGN'BLE Mr.JusTICé Q L_MA§JU$AfH M AND »~_ . , ... THE HoN'BL£ Mzsg3wsT:cE_Bfv_NA§ARA?HwA BETWEEN: 'w~.;§ 1_ €.f -. =f»-Wf 1.
, m ii)
-.. ‘
Smt B.A.ShakQnthé;a’*f_ _i
W/o.Adinaray&n3VGuptaA*f~
Aged Maj0r_V[ RH”-“2»V
Rfa NQ.7§f114,_Survey@:_St:eet
Basavanagudi ‘f._W w ”
Bangalore+S60’QO3jv
Represent@Q”by herj”
GPA hoider”=_ = I
Adin§rayana Gupta V
Since dead by her LRs.,
/o.”T;Seetharam Setty
” Aged about 65 years
¢;*T ‘S7fldifiafayana Gupta
®*m»
B”Afsrinath
,’ “p$fo.B S Adinarayana Gupta
=__Aged about 34 years
Both Al and A2 are
Residing at No.75/114
Surveycr Street, Basavanagudi
Bangalorewfiéo G03
_ 2 M
N P Lakshmi
flf0.M K Prakashkumar
Aged about 38 years
No.153, New No.361G
16″ Main Road
4” ‘w’ Block,
Bangalore-4
111}
Jayafiagar
Sudha R Prasad. ~m.
Wfa. K L Rajendra Pras3d, ”
Aged about 36 years _f} ‘A
Na.44, 13″ Cr0ss’_ ‘
I Floer,-10″ Main;
Malleshwaram 3 1u7
BangalQr$#53.v} ;
iv)
u “”AppaLLANEs
(By Sri_Ravis$afika;,,Adfi;} fox Sri K G Raghavan,
J ‘t I T’; . – I ~
AND:
1.
S Nagapaj V 2
S[siSh§vaQanjappaWM
.m.ggéfi Major
‘Residi§§Cat No.1G9
‘Wu3%.Main.Road_»
E8wJCrosSaCwrner
Maileshwaram
Bangalmre
“, Since fieceaseé
‘2 Represented by
‘fiéspcndents No.2 ta 8
2.
S N Mmnesh
3/0. S Nagaraj
Aged Major
Residing at No.10?
8% Main Rsad
18″ Cross Carner
Malleshwaxam
Eangalore
Ja§anthi-
Bf0..$_Nagaraj
Aged Majox
8:” Main Roafi
Residing at,N¢+}O9 1
1s”*crcss”c§zéerl Va.’
Malleshwah§m ;{
Bangal3xe_ g
Suahma “”v ?
Die. S=Nagara§’
Aged Majox” V
Rasiding_3t fio,i0§kV
8?” Main Rnad~,
“<,_1g§%¢;QSS cGrfié£.m ….
. , i»iaJ.-3. 2a$._i=..s;-z«:1;:jz::«;_1:a
F. Bafigaifirefg
Re§Q§né'
3/6, S Nagaraj
Agedzfiajoz
V"»Res:aing'at No.10?
V' :'8t'x.'f'
uMain'Read
" 18% Cross Corner
fialieéhwaram
"~ fl .§aa§alere
Babu
SWO. S Nagaraj
Aged Major
Residing at No.18?
8″ Main Road
18″ Crass Carma:
Malleshwaram .>W»
Bamgalore 1
<3\
7. Manjula
Dffl. S Nagaraj
Aged Maja:
Residing at No.109
8″ Main Road .”¢
18″ Cross Cornar
Malleshwaram
Bangalore ,_ ,m,_x
8. S N Ma1a;h1V* a ‘ W ‘fi
W/0. Seceaseé S fiagaraj,
Residing at Nca1§9 .” ‘
8% Main Road V _A
18″ Crass Cczfiér
Maliashwagam “V- ….. M.
w.Ba5ga1¢xe¥_ RESPGNDENTS
. <:a:3 7R§Af%?:L£a U/3.96 OF 090, AGAENST THE
JUDGMENT DATED 3.12.1996 AND BECREE SATED
'" 9.12.&99§;',?ASSED an o.s.No.2434/198:, ON THE
?ILE OF THE I ABEL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BQNGALORE,
'_ *DISMISSING" THE SUIT FOR. SPECIFIC PERFORMRNCE OF
2 'THE AGREEMENT AND ?GR MESNE PROFITS.
THEE APPEAL CGMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
~ DAY; MANJUNATH, J., SELIVERED THE Fczzewxme:
m 5 –
plaintiff for a sale eonsideratiQfim”CiQfE;.*
Rs.4,58,GG§f–. Accerdingly, an agreement of ssie
was entered into between :the_.’petties_i.onV,_f
20.9.1978. A sum of 2s.6o,0Qo;» paid as efifiaece ”
saie consideration and baianee sale Censidefetiem
was agreed to be paid ,by ;tHe’tpleintiffH”atx the
time of registration of the safiefl _’=i
that e furthef sum ef=$s,é,GCOfi~ was paid to the
defendant tape Mthreetrmenthsi time was stipulated
for registratiQs’vef ithe. sale deed. Though the
1eeleintiffYfwaez reee§'”end. “” wiiiing to perform her
V’u,expreseed
pé:t”ef’t§eiegnthact, in View of the difficulties
~ *¢ge av<
..the} defendant to complete the
ig_tfensactiee_within the time stipulated, requested
'*4the»flfilaintiff' to extend the time by one month
4t;_fto$.iS.i2.1978. figain the time was extended for
"a:ferther peried of three months from 17.2.19?9.
tV thereafter, it was extended till 15.8.3Q?9. When
€V
filed a
that the suit property is a joint family profiertyvf
and each of them are having 1f7%_eee:ehandVthat_1
the agreement entered to :have fbeen exeedted 'hf*
_ 9 m
separate written statement cefitendingg '
the first defendant doee";net bind' thee "end
requested
5.
following
fu-1
the Court :5 dismiss the suit. “””
BasedV on the._éhc§e”t§ieadings, the
issdea are fremed:¥A’d=
Whether the defendant No.1 proves that
the’ ‘transaction’ is only a loan
‘ transactien”uahdf the alieged agreement
,:’I'(,.:
Vie”e_nemieai_one?
. ‘.Whether{ the plaintiff proves that she
‘~,has always been ready and willing to
itaperform her part of the contract?
.’t7@hether the defendant No.1 proves that
the subsequent agreements for extension
“ef’time are got up decuments?
. . Whether the defendant No.1 proves that
the transaction is unfair?
Whether the plaintiff is entitled for
Specific performance of the contract?
Whether the plaintiff’ is entitled for
mesne profits?
-11-
No.7 as per final order and additional iesue in
affirmative and dismissed the _eeitjlhynVite__1
Judgment and Decree datedl 3.l2tl996,,X.iBeingl
aggrieved by the Judgment aha fiecree of the trial
Court, the present appeal iewfiled:*l
?. After uarguing lthe emattefif in full,
before dictatine”_:the €e§nd§ment}”W:the learned
Counsel for gpeellahtehheelfiled a memo stating
that the aepellantfi eeule _neetrict their relief
only for refund aefgaeahee sale consideratioe of
Rs.64,0-0,0/-piaidfl the plaintiff to the
lldefenfiantx withi intefest and that the appellant
d3es_”netlierees for the relief of specific
petfQfmenCe;l}The meme signed by the Counsel for
Vla_ appellant and LRs., of the appellant is placed en
~.;’ge§o§e, In View of the memo filed by the
‘=e ltapfiellant and Counsel for the Appellant, this
“,¢5§;t has to examine whether the appellant”
plaintiff is entitled for refund of a sum of
(V,
-14-
plaintiff was not entitled for tte discretionary
relief of specific performaace, since the .same,
point is not considered as the giaintifff is ,’
williag to tender Pwwi for cross-examieatiofih we
are of the opinion that in: the ;ifitereat,;ef__1
fiustice, the Judgment and_ Qecreed,of the “triaid
Court has to be set aside aad the matter E3; to
be remanded only ta, §fin5idertdt59, Caée”~efV the
ylaintiff for refefid’iH_éf’ d’advance sale
consideration with interest in View of the memo
filed by tfieaappeilantyagd its Counsel.
95′”_In the resfilt, the Judgment and Decree
5 passed b? tte Addi: City Civil Judge, Bangalore
iau:Q;§;fie:243%fi981 dated 3.12.1996 are hereby
Z ” set aeide..d$he matter is remanded to the trial
“~aCcurt fer ~fresh consideration only’ te consider
V’,the. relief of refund. of advance amount said to
ihdfiave been paid by the plaintiff. In View of the
vd=.»dpayment, the trial Ceert issue fresh notiee ta
8/
-15-
agreemeat of sale, ha requests this C0u;t *:Q,
permit him to withdraw the Bank <;L:;j;–;1re;:x%%4~;a%¢
furnished.
12. En View of the changedq éircfims:ance$;_”u
the appel}ants~plaintiff§ *,are ” enti§;éd”~wEo
withdraw the Bank Guatanteé fqrni§hefiff fl;.3v
s %
. v – ‘ . V; 3%
. . ‘ . .. ~. . ‘. , $Am_{:5
fggfigg
$?€§§t§§¥§-
fl