RADHA BAI Vs. YASODA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals arise out of the judgment and decree dated 12th June, 1995 passed in O.S.No. 1071 of 1985 by the Court of the IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Of course, it is a common judgment in the said suit and also in suit O.S.No. 548 of 1990. In O.S.No. 1071 of 1985, one P. Kishanlal is the plaintiff and as he died, his legal representatives were added as plaintiffs 2 to 8. That is a suit instituted against M/s. Smt. Yasoda Bai, V. Narasimha Chary and Angoori Bai claiming specific performance in respect of suit schedule building comprising of two floors and bearing municipal Nos. 21-2-146 and 21-2-156 situated at Gulzar House, Charkaman, Hyderabad. In O.S.No. 548 of 1990, same P. Kishanlal is the plaintiff and on account of his death, his legal representatives were added as plaintiffs 2 to 8 and the defendants are M/s. Angoori Bai, Chaturbhuj and V. Narasimha Chary. In the said suit, the relief is for the grant of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the ground floor mulgi bearing No. 21-2-156.

(2.) The suit in O.S.No. 1071 of 1985 is based on oral agreement for consideration amount of Rs. 3.00 lakhs and the plaintiffs' case is that Rs. 25,000 was paid and thereafter the 1st defendant who is the owner has not honoured the said agreement for sale and then executed sale-deeds in favour of defendants 2 and 3 in respect of the ground floor shop and the premises on the upper floor respectively. Both the suits were decreed by the trial court. The decree granted in O.S. No. 548 of 1990 is a question apart in these three appeals.

(3.) While CCCA No. 112/95 is filed by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree of the Court below levying interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum on the amount of balance consideration amount of Rs. 2,75,000 directed to be paid within three months, CCCA No. 124 of 1995 is filed by defendants 1 and 3 against the decree granted for specific performance relating to the ground floor portion and CCCA No. 141 of 1995 is filed by the 2nd defendant aggrieved by the grant of specific performance relating to the upstairs portion.