Case Summary
K.A. Antony filed a suit for specific performance of a contract regarding a property against Usha. The plaintiff claims the defendant failed to fulfill the terms of the agreement for sale, and seeks to recover the advance payment made.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant shall pay Rs. 3,00,000 along with interest.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendant to pay Rs. 3,00,000 with interest for the advance paid. Further, a charge was established over the property for securing the decree amount.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the plaintiff had established the case by proving the advance payments made and the failure of the defendant to comply with the agreement.
The court found that the plaintiff had established the case by proving the advance payments made and the failure of the defendant to comply with the agreement.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found that the plaintiff had established the case by proving the advance payments made and the failure of the defendant to comply with the agreement.
The court found that the plaintiff had established the case by proving the advance payments made and the failure of the defendant to comply with the agreement.
Supporting Evidence
I am of the view that plaintiff has established his case that he has given Rs.2,50,000 to defendant as advance sale consideration and Rs.50,000 was expended for filling plaint schedule property with gravel and is entitled to realize the said amount with interest from the defendant.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: (1) Defendant shall pay Rs. 3,00,000 along with interest 9% per annum from 07.06.2014, till the date of decree and 6% from the date of decree till the date of payment or realization, as the case may be, to the plaintiff.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- K.A. Antony @ Albin
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Usha
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Agreement for Sale dated 27.06.2013, Original of partition deed No.1034/2003, Location plan certificate No. 6239/12
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- B. Jayaprakash
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Renju John
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Suja.R.Nair
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- N. Sujatha
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- T.K. Usha Rani
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sindhu.K.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Viswambharan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff sought to recover Rs.3,00,000 paid as advance sale consideration.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: Defendant shall pay Rs. 3,00,000/ (Rupees Three Lakhs only) along with interest 9% per annum from 07.06.2014, till the date of decree and 6% from the date of decree till the date of payment or realization, as the case may be, to the plaintiff.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Agreement for sale
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document evidences the agreement between the plaintiff and defendant regarding the sale of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Original of duplicate partition deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the defendant's ownership of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Location Plan Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provides details concerning the location of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report confirms the extent of the plaint schedule property as evaluated by the court.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch prepared by the surveyor
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This sketch supports the commission report concerning the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between K.A. Antony @ Albin vs Usha regarding specific performance of contract
Case Code Year
Case between K.A. Antony @ Albin vs Usha regarding specific performance of contract