Aktuelle Neuigkeiten zum Oldtimertreffen

Suit For Specific Performance On The Basis Of Unregistered Agreement To Sell

7.M. Rishi Raj claims property rights through an earlier series of documents executed by Mr. Kamlesh Chandra on his behalf on 26 March 2012. Mr. Kamlesh Chandra claimed the rights to the property in court on the basis of a General Attorney and Agreement to Sell case, as well as similar documents by Mr. Amit Gupta, dated August 17, 2011. … Relief of the special benefit on the basis of the unregulated agreement for sale and also prays for the cancellation of the registered deed of sale executed by the original owner for the benefit of third parties. Both appeals should be tried at the same time. It has also been argued that the parties are almost equal, the quality of prosecution is the same and in both actions is the same unreg registered agreement for the sale a problem… The applicants are original defendants and claim to be aggrieved by the granting of a provisional action by the court formed in Special Action 134 of 2013.

In the aforementioned appeal, the applicant asserts… the judgment in Gurbachan Singh (supra) was quashed, which reads: “a) a legal action for a defined benefit on an unregord contract/contract for the sale … Contract to the extent that, even if it is not registered, it can form the basis of legal action for a specified benefit and be invoked as evidence of the agreement or partial performance of a contract… Rejecting the applicant`s and respondent`s complaint was admitted and the appeal was ordered. Applicant-defendant party has filed a complaint for the specific statement and benefit they… 25. The complainant`s qualified lawyer, Mr. Rishi Raj and others, also argue that his clients admit the execution of the documents of 6 August 2013 and have no objections when the ownership of the property is handed over to the applicant, Mr. Rakesh Yadav. On his behalf, it is presented that Mr. Kamlesh Chandra was merely a janitor who refused to evacuate the property when he sold it to Mr.

Rishi Raj. It is also argued that defendant No. 4, Mr. Kamlesh Chandra, has no right to the title of appeal. … decree of the specific benefit was granted to him.

Back to top