POTHEPALLI NAGABHUSHANAM Vs. RAVIPATI SUBBA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SECOND Appeal No. 192 of 1999 is filed by the first defendant being aggrieved by the reversing decree and judgment made in A. S. No. 13 of 1995 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, addanki. Likewise, Second Appeal No. 210 of 1999 is preferred as against the selfsame decree and judgment by defendants 2 and 3 and hence both these matters are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THE first respondent in these second appeals Ravipati Subba Rao filed the suit o. S. No. 199 of 1984 on the file of the additional District Munsif, Addanki, praying for the relief of specific performance of agreement of sale dated 18. 6. 1981. The learned District Munsif, on the strength of respective pleadings of the parties, having settled the issues, recorded the evidence of pws. 1 to 3, DWs. 1 to 3, marked Exs. A. 1 to A. 4, Ex. B. l and ultimately came to the conclusion that the plaintiff was not entitled to the relief of specific performance of agreement of sale dated 18. 6. 1981 and dismissed the suit. Aggrieved by the same, the said Ravipati Subba Rao carried the matter by way of appeal A. S. No. 13 of 1995 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, addanki and the appellate Court having framed the point for consideration at Para 11, recorded reasons in detail and came to the conclusion that the decree and judgment made by the Court of first instance cannot be sustained and accordingly the dismissal of the suit was set aside and the relief of specific performance was granted. Aggrieved by the same, the present second appeals are preferred.

(3.) THE substantial questions of law raised in S. A. No. 192 of 1999 are as hereunder :