VEERA PRATAPA KORIKONDA HAMVIRA KRISHNAMRAJU Vs. KOPPALU NARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri J. P. Rao representing Sri Jakkamsetti Ravindra, the learned Counsel representing the appellants, and Sri Veeraiah representing Nimmagadda satyanarayana, the learned Counsel representing the contesting respondents.

(2.) THE Apex Court through its order dated 22. 7. 2004 while allowing Civil Appeal no. 1526 of 2000, observed as under: "since the High Court has interfered with the judgments of the Courts below without framing substantial question of law, the same is set aside and the case is remitted back to the High Court for fresh decision after framing substantial questions of law if in its opinion such question of law arises. Since the second appeal pertains to the year 1982, we would request the High Court to dispose of the second appeal as expeditiously as possible. The appeal is allowed in the above terms. No costs.

(3.) THE said civil appeal was preferred by the defendants as against the order made in S. A. No. 382 of 1991 wherein this Court while setting aside the decree passed for alternative relief of refund of sale consideration in favour of the plaintiffs, which had been ordered by both the Court of first instance and also the appellate Court, directed the defendants to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs within a period of three months from the date of the judgment and accept the balance of consideration, if any, as per Ex. A. 1, and if the defendants fail to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs within the specified time, then the trial Court should execute sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs.