SHANKAR NARAYAN TIMMANNA Vs. PUTTU BHATTA MANJU BHATTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of this case attract attention by their naivete.

(2.) There was an agreement between the first plaintiff and the first defendant. By it the first defendant was to transfer to the first plaintiff certain property, which I shall ca11 property A; and the first plaintiff was to cause a third person to transfer to the first defendant the property, which I shall call property B. At least, it was assumed before me that the Latter is the effect to be given to the third clause of Exhibit 31.

(3.) The first defendant carried out his part of the contract to the extent that the property A was conveyed to the plaintiff by a conveyance made on April 13, 1919. The plaintiff did not obtain possession : the present suit was brought on June 19, 1925,-more than six years alter the conveyance-not for possession, but for a declaration under 8. 42 of the Specific Relief Act, that the first plaintiff had become entitled to property A.