Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 23 views

    LIMITATION

    Uploaded by

    jainnavya789
    An agreement to sell property was executed in favor of the respondents by the appellants. The appellants did not apply for permission to sell the property within the required timeframe as outlined in the agreement. The respondents filed a lawsuit which was ruled in their favor initially but overturned on appeal. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that the respondents waited over five years without providing notice or explaining their delay before filing the lawsuit, and did not mention informing the appellants of their readiness to complete the sale. The Court overturned the previous judgment, concluding there was no valid reason for the respondents' lengthy delay in filing the lawsuit.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    LIMITATION

    Uploaded by

    jainnavya789
    23 views2 pages
    An agreement to sell property was executed in favor of the respondents by the appellants. The appellants did not apply for permission to sell the property within the required timeframe as outlined in the agreement. The respondents filed a lawsuit which was ruled in their favor initially but overturned on appeal. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that the respondents waited over five years without providing notice or explaining their delay before filing the lawsuit, and did not mention informing the appellants of their readiness to complete the sale. The Court overturned the previous judgment, concluding there was no valid reason for the respondents' lengthy delay in filing the lawsuit.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    An agreement to sell property was executed in favor of the respondents by the appellants. The appellants did not apply for permission to sell the property within the required timeframe as outlined in the agreement. The respondents filed a lawsuit which was ruled in their favor initially but overturned on appeal. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that the respondents waited over five years without providing notice or explaining their delay before filing the lawsuit, and did not mention informing the appellants of their readiness to complete the sale. The Court overturned the previous judgment, concluding there was no valid reason for the respondents' lengthy delay in filing the lawsuit.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    23 views2 pages

    LIMITATION

    Uploaded by

    jainnavya789
    An agreement to sell property was executed in favor of the respondents by the appellants. The appellants did not apply for permission to sell the property within the required timeframe as outlined in the agreement. The respondents filed a lawsuit which was ruled in their favor initially but overturned on appeal. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that the respondents waited over five years without providing notice or explaining their delay before filing the lawsuit, and did not mention informing the appellants of their readiness to complete the sale. The Court overturned the previous judgment, concluding there was no valid reason for the respondents' lengthy delay in filing the lawsuit.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Case Title – Sabbir (Dead) Through Lrs V.

    Anjuman (Since Deceased) Through Lrs


    Citation – 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1292
    Bench – Justice Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah
    Date of Judgement – September 22, 2023

    Background of the Case

    An Agreement to Sell was executed in favour of the respondents by the appellants. The said
    agreement envisioned that the appellants had to apply for permission to sell the property
    within eight days and upon permission being received, the same was to be intimated to the
    respondents and the Sale Deed was to be executed within 15 days from receipt of such
    intimation by the respondents. The appellants did not apply for any permission to sell which
    led to the respondents filing Suit. The suit was decreed by judgment dated 08.03.1982. An
    appeal was filed by the appellants which was accepted by the First Appellate Tribunal and
    thereafter the respondents thereafter filed Second Appeal which was allowed by the High
    Court. The appellants then carried the case to this Court, which remanded the matter to the
    High Court. On remand, the High Court again allowed the Second Appeal by its judgment
    reversing the finding(s) of the First Appellate Court.

    The case is appeal is directed against the Final Judgment and Order passed by the High Court
    of Judicature at Allahabad in the Second filed by the respondents was allowed.

    Verdict of the Supreme Court

    The Court held that it was the responsibility of the appellants to apply for permission within
    eight days. Once they received permission, they needed to inform the respondents, after
    which the respondents had 15 days to complete the Sale Deed. If the appellants failed to
    apply for permission or didn't inform the respondents upon receiving permission, the
    respondents had the right to go to Court to enforce the sale and take possession. However,
    after the eighth day, if the appellants had not applied for permission, the responsibility would
    shift to the respondents.
    The Court noted that the respondents had not provided any notice to the appellants for five
    and a half years to explain why they were waiting. Additionally, there was no mention in the
    lawsuit that the respondents had informed the appellants about their readiness to pay the
    remaining amount and execute the Sale Deed. Due to these factors and the lack of any
    reasonable explanation, the Court found no valid or justifiable reason for the respondents to
    wait for over five years before filing the lawsuit. As a result, the Court overturned the
    previous judgment and ruled in favour of the appellants.

    You might also like