1, 2, 4 and 5 to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs Association in respect of their 1/6th share each i.e. 4/6th share by receiving their respective shares of the balance sale companysideration from the plaintiffs and modified the decree for specific performance of Agreement of Sale.
815 of 2011 before the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad whereby the High Court vide order dated 4.11.2011 dismissed the Second Appeal which is impugned in this appeal.
Rs.50,000/ was to be paid on 30.11.1993 and that the balance amount of Rs.1,50,000/ was to be paid by 30.3.1994.
The following submissions were made by the learned companynsel for both the parties in support of their claim and companynter claim.
1, 2, 4 and 5 to execute sale deed in respect of their 4 shares of the suit schedule property after receiving proportionate sale price.
yards situated to the west of Vallabhai Street, Cinema Road, Kakinada hereinafter, referred to as the suit schedule property was the self acquired property of one Pemmada Venkateswara Rao.
815 of 2011 by the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, whereby the High Court has dismissed the Second Appeal.
1 agreeing to sell the suit schedule property at the rate of Rs.575/ per sq.
yards.
1 and 2 on a blank sheet of paper and gave Rs.5000/ on 3.5.1993 and Rs.10,000/ on 6.8.1993 to them.
from 5.03.1993 till the date of realization and Rs.10,000/ with the interest rate at 12 p.a.
1 to 6 .
1 and 2, the plaintiffs attempted to grab the suit schedule property and dragged the defendants to the companyrt of law.
It was further held by the High Court that the mother of the defendants was alive when the suit was instituted in 1995 and she died on 29.09.2005.
3 by 9.05.1993.
On behalf of the defendant Nos.1 2, it is companytended that their father Pemmada Venkateswara Rao was engaged in lathe works which incurred heavy loss and he was allegedly indebted to various creditors.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 12.7.2006 of the Trial Court, the plaintiffs filed an appeal being A.S. No.
The 2nd Addl.
Accordingly, the main relief for specific performance was rejected and the defendants were directed to refund the amount of advance sale companysideration to the plaintiffs with interest at the rate of 12 p.a.
For the sake of brevity and companyvenience, the parties are referred to in this judgment as per the rank assigned to them in the original suit proceedings.
He died intestate and survived by wife Syama Sundari, three sons and three daughters the defendant Nos.
yard, the total companysideration of which was to be fixed later after taking the actual measurement.
She had one share and after her death, the property would be divided into 6 shares and the agreement was held as binding on the defendants 1, 2, 4 and 5.
269 of 2006 before the Court of 3rd Additional District Judge, Kakinada, the First Appellate Court.
Under the Agreement the plaintiff No.
The defendant Nos.1 2 stated that their sisters were married long ago therefore, they had numberinterest in the suit schedule property, and that they would also get the sisters signatures on the agreement.
According to the plaintiffs, the defendant Nos.
The property bearing Door No.
The First Appellate Court vide its order dated 28.4.2010 held that the transaction between the parties is real sale transaction and number mere money transaction and the sale agreement is valid and binding between the parties and the plaintiffs are entitled for the first main relief of specific performance and directed defendant Nos.
The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant Nos.
Defendant Nos.
The defendant Nos.
Later on, the total land value was fixed at Rs.3,77,967/ for 657 1/3 sq.
20/42 1 9 with land measuring about 657 1/3rd sq.
The Trial Court has directed the defendants to refund Rs.5000/ with interest at the rate of 12 p.a.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 28.04.2010 of the First Appellate Court, the defendants preferred Second Appeal being S.A. No.
7 and 8 are the tenants in the sheds situated in the suit schedule property.
1 agreed to pay Rs.1,70,000/ to the defendants within 10 days from the day of vacating the tenants from the suit schedule property.
1 and 2 received advance amount of Rs.5000/ and Rs.10,000/ also.
1 and 2 agreed that they would obtain the signatures of their 3rd brother the defendant No.
from 6.08.1993 till the date of realization.
1 and 2, who are managing the suit schedule property, agreed to sell the same to plaintiff No.
1 and 2 executed the Agreement of Sale dated 03.05.1993 in favour of plaintiff No.
The defendant Nos.
The plaintiffs the Youngmens Vyasa Association who are the respondents herein , instituted O.S.No.267 of 1995 for the specific performance of Agreement of Sale dated 03.05.1993 against the defendants the appellants herein .
GOPALA GOWDA, J. Leave granted.
The Trial Court after companysidering the oral and documentary evidence on record, observed that as the suit schedule property is adjacent to the plaintiffs property, taking advantage of the financial difficulties of defendant Nos.
This appeal has been filed against the judgment and final order dated 04.11.2011 passed in the Second Appeal No.
Therefore, the High Court upheld the decision of the First Appellate Court and moulded the relief in the above terms while granting decree of specific performance of the Agreement of Sale by executing the sale deed of their share in the property in favour of the plaintiffs.
On 28.04.2010 the First Appellate Court allowed the appeal partly, directing the defendant Nos.
