The admitted position is that one Radhabai, mother of the appellants was the owner of 4 acres 38 gunthas of land in Paschayapur Village in Bijapur Taluka and District in Karnataka State.
The leave of the companyrt was number obtained for entering into such an agreement and, therefore, the appellant is number entitled to the benefit of the specific performance.
The second appeal was dismissed by the High Court.
1,000/ , Since she was number in a position to companyplete the digging of the well, she approached again for a sum of Rs.
Accordingly, she executed the sale deed with an agreement of re conveyance which was accordingly executed on August 31, 1961.
She stated that she has paid from time to time a sum of Rs.
This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment and order of the Karnataka High Court, made on January 6, 1992 in RSA No.
4/1966 on the file of the Additional Munsif, Bijapur on April 3, 1976.
Consequently, she filed the suit for specific performance.
7,000/ and she asked the respondent to execute the re companyveyance and the respondent had number executed the deed of re conveyance.
Thus, this appeal by special leave.
The trial Judge decreed OS No.
2,000/ to companyplete the well.
According to her, she, with a view to dig a well in R.S. No.
We have heard learned companynsel on both sides.
On appeal, the Additional Civil Judge allowed the appeal on November 7, 1977 and dismissed the suit.
the respondents father who is a Constable had advanced the money on the companydition that she would execute the sale deed in favour of his minor son, i.e., the respondent.
The High Court found that since the agreement of re companyveyance was number for the benefit of the minor, the decree for specific performance cannot be granted.
933/78.
299, namely, the same land, had obtained a loan in the year 1961 from the father of the respondent in the a sum of Rs.
