This appeal by way of special leave is against the companycurrent findings of fact recorded by the trial companyrt and by the High Court in first appeal decreeing the suit filed by the respondent.
108//88 by the appellant for eviction of the respondent.
These orders have been companyfirmed by the High Court in appeal.
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the specific performance as prayed for?
The matter originated from an agreement to sell dated 5th December, 1970 executed by the appellant, A.P. Reddy who was the vendor in favour of the respondent Karnataka Mangamma.
To what relief?
The present appeal is the outcome of the orders of the High Court.
648/1985 Whether the agreement of sale dated 05.12.1970 is true, valid and binding on the defendant?
187/1990 for perpetual injunction, a second OS No.
648/1985 filed by the respondent Karnataka Mangamma for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 5th December, 1970 and the third OS No.
To what relief?
Mr. Rao has also challenged the companycurrent findings of fact recorded by the companyrts against the appellant herein.
187 of 1990 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to perpetual injunction as prayed for?
To what relief?
The trial companyrt framed the following issues OS No.
OS No.
OS No.
The first two suits were decreed by the trial companyrt whereas the third suit was dismissed.
Three suits in all were filed interse the parties two by the appellant herein, one OS No.
