Sri Subrata Chowdhury vs. Sri Amaresh Chandra Debnath
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Mention Memo
Before:
Hon'ble M.R. Shah, Hon'ble B.V. Nagarathna
Stage:
FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES
Remarks:
Dismissed
Listed On:
18 Jul 2022
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.31
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 11894/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-04-2022 11/2018 passed by the High Court of Tripura at in RFA No. Agarthala)
SRI SUBRATA CHOWDHURY
VERSUS
SRI AMARESH CHANDRA DEBNATH
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No. 92855/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.92857/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.92856/2022-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES )
Date: 18-07-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA
| For Petitioner(s) | Mr. Abhijat, Adv | |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Nidhi Mohan Parashar, AOR | ||
| Mr. Harkirat, Adv | ||
| Mr. Param Agarwal, Adv. | ||
| For Respondent(s) |
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and having gone through the findings recorded by the Trial Court on the readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff to perform his part of the contract, more particularly, considering the fact that when the plaintiff issued notice and called upon the defendant to execute the sale deed, the same was not accepted/not ature Not Verif ponded by the defendant and even thereafter also the plaintiff $\overline{33.03}$ went to the residence of the defendant with one Santanu Sharma
contd..
Petitioner(s)
Respondent(s)
(Bhattacherjee) PW-2 to deliver the cheque drawn in favour of the defendant and requested the defendant to execute the sale deed but the defendant refused to accept the same, both the courts below have rightly observed and given the findings against the defendant on the readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff to perform his part of the contract.
In that view of the matter, no interference of this Court is called for in exercise of powers under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The Special Leave Petition stands dismissed.
Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
(NEETU SACHDEVA) (NISHA TRIPATHI) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR