Y RAMALINGA REDDY Vs. CHARLA GOLLA VENUGOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Vedula Venkataramana, the learned counsel representing the appellant and Sri C. Sadasiva Reddy, the learned counsel representing the first respondent.

(2.) The unsuccessful second defendant in both the Courts below had preferred the second appeal. This Court on 1-5-1997 admitted the second appeal on the following substantial questions of law specified in ground No.5 of the Memorandum of Appeal;

(3.) Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, the learned counsel representing the appellant/ second defendant would submit that findings had been recorded by both the Courts below relating to Ex A-1 without a specific issue being framed in this regard The learned counsel also pointed out that the relief of specific performance itself is a discretionary relief and the Courts below definitely erred in decreeing the suit of the first respondent herein-plaintiff The learned counsel had taken this Court through the respective pleadings of the parties and the findings recorded by both the Courts below in this regard He placed strong reliance on Manjunath Anandappa Urf Shivappa Hansi v Tammanasa and Shankarlal Narayandas Mundade v The New Mofussil Company Ltd.