B.M. KRISHNAPPA Vs. K.V. SRIRAMAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in a suit for specific performance of the contract has filed this second appeal. Suit was instituted with reference to an agreement of sale dated 04.03.1989, to direct the defendant to execute the registered sale deed in respect of the suit schedule property. Suit having been contested by filing the written statement, the issues were raised. Later, finding that the issues raised to be not in proper order, were recasted as follows:

(2.) Plaintiff got examined himself as PW1 and examined three witnesses as PWs.2 to 4 and marked seven documents as Exs.P1 to P7. The defendant got himself examined as DW1 and also examined three witnesses as DWs.2 to 4 and marked five documents as Exs.D1 to D5. The Trial Judge having regard to the submissions made by the learned advocates appearing for the parties, found the suit to be devoid of merit and passed a decree of dismissal. Assailing the said decree, an appeal under Section 96 of CPC was filed. The Lower Appellate Court raised general points for consideration and dismissed the appeal. Assailing the said decrees, this second appeal was filed.

(3.) Sri.G.Papi Reddy, learned advocate for the appellant, in support of the appeal raised various contentions. It is unnecessary to refer to all the contentions. The main contention was with reference to the judgment of the Court below being not in consonance with the requirements of Order 41 Rule 31 of CPC.