KAKARLA VENKATASUBBAYYA Vs. SRAVANAM VENKATARATHNAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal is against the Judgment and decree passed by our learned brother Panchapakesa Aiyar J. confirming the lower appellate Court's order directing appellants defendants 1 and 2 to execute a fresh sale-deed and get it registered and modifying the lower appellate Court's decree so far as costs were concerned.

(2.) The facts involved in this Letters Patent Appeal have been elaborately set out by our learned brother in his judgment dated 12-12-1,949. We do not think it is necessary for us to restate them over again in this judgment.

(3.) Two main legal contentions have been raised in this appeal by the learned counsel for the appellants. The first contention is that the suit is not maintainable, as Section 77, Registration Act has not been complied with, and that unless the remedy provided under Section 77, Registration Act is sought by setting the machinery provided therefor in motion, a suit for specific performance cannot lie. The second contention is that, in second appeal, it was not open to the learned Judge to upset a concurrent finding of fact arrived at by the trial as well as the appellate Courts in regard to the genuineness of the signatures of the first defendant in Ex. P. 5 dated 5-2-1942.