Proceeding Sheet vs This Second Appeal Arises Against ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 4385 AP

            HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI

                     MAIN CASE No: S.A.No. 274 OF 2019

                                 PROCEEDING SHEET
SL.                                                                              OFFICE
        DATE                                ORDER
No.                                                                               NOTE
12.   21.07.2022   BKM, J

                          Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the
                   appellant and none appears for the respondents.

This Second Appeal arises against the Judgment and Decree in A.S.No.56 of 2018 on the file of XIII-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Krishna, Vijayawada dated 02.04.2019 confirming the Judgment in O.S.No.693 of 2010 on the file of VII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada dated 08.01.2018.

The appellant herein is the appellant before the lower appellate Court and the plaintiff in the suit before the trial Court. The respondents herein are the respondents before the lower appellate Court and the defendants in the suit before the trial Court.

The common Judgment was rendered by the trial Court in O.S.Nos.693 of 2010 and 1109 of 2010 vide its Judgment and Decree dated 08.01.2018 against which the lower appellate Court also rendered a common Judgment in A.S.No.55 of 2018 and A.S.No.56 of 2018 dated 02.04.2019 confirming the same. But this Second Appeal arises against the A.S.No.56 of 2018 and O.S.No.693 of 2010 as stated supra. Though, it is a confirming Judgment, the following substantial questions of law arises for consideration of this Court at the final hearing.

(1) Whether the courts below are correct in dismissing the suit for specific performance of contract of sale, having recorded finding that the defendant failed to establish about the

SL. OFFICE DATE ORDER No. NOTE letter of understanding dated 05.04.2015 and about the reimbursement of the advance payment of Rs.2.00 lakhs paid vide Ex.B2 to B5.

(2) Whether decree and judgment of the court below is not liable to be set aside, as they filed to understand the scope and interpretation of Ex.B1 registered sale deed.

(3) Whether the courts below are correct in arriving at conclusion that the plaintiff is not entitled for specific performance of the contract of sale, having arrived at a conclusion that the plaintiff has paid part of the sale consideration under Ex.B2 to B5 and that the said amount has not been reimbursed.

In view of the above said substantial questions of law, the Second Appeal is Admitted.

List the appeal for 'Final Hearing'.

__________ BKM, J Yvk