.C. ), 2018 (5 )ALD1 , 2018 (5 )ALLMR449 , 2018 (129 ) ALR 882 , 2018 (5 )ALT27 , 2018 (3 )BLJ(SC )146 , 2018 (4 )BomCR741 , 2018 (3 ) CCC 272 (SC ), 2018 (4 ) CHN (SC ) 109 , 2018 (3 )CLJ(SC )33 , 2018 (II )CLR(SC)703 , 2018 (4 ) Him. LR. (NULL ) 2319 , 2018 INSC 578 , 2018 -5 -LW363 , 2019 (3 )MhLj550 , 2018 (III )MPJR(SC)180 , 2019 (2 )MPLJ540 , 2018 (II )OLR697 , (2018 )191 PLR657 , 2018 (3 )RCR(Civil)468 , 2018 141 RD557 , 2018 (8 )SCALE513 , (2018 )7 SCC639 , 2018 (10 ) SCJ 385 , [2018 ]5 SCR173 , 2018 (3 )UC1960 , (2018 )5 WBLR(SC )9 , 2018 (4 ) WLN 119 (SC ), ,MANU/SC/0685/2018
Dipak Misra#A.M. Khanwilkar#D.Y. Chandrachud#353SC4550Judgment/OrderAIC#ALD#AllMR#ALR#ALT#BLJ#BomCR#CCC#CHN#CLJ#CurLR#Him. LR.#INSC#LW#MANU#MhLJ#MPJR#MPLJ#OLR#PLR#RCR (Civil)#RD#SCALE#SCC#SCJ#SCR#UC#WBLR#WLNA.M. Khanwilkar,SUPREME COURT OF INDIA2018-7-626524,21542,26565 -->
MANU/SC/0685/2018
True Court CopyTM English
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Civil Appeal No. 18377 of 2017 +
Decided On: 04.07.2018
Appellants: Ameer Minhaj Vs. Respondent: Dierdre Elizabeth (Wright) Issar and Ors. ..(+)
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Dipak Misra, C.J.I., A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud JUDGMENT
A.M. Khanwilkar, J.
1. This appeal emanates from the decision of the High Court dated 2nd December, 2016 allowing the application preferred by Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 (Defendant Nos. 3 & 4) whereby the admissibility of the documents produced by the Appellant (Plaintiff) in the suit filed by him for relief of specific performance of contract with alternative relief of refund of advance amount and permanent injunction against the Defendants was questioned.
2. The Appellant filed a suit in the Court of District Judge of the Nilgiris at Udhagamandalam, being O.S. No. 23 of 2010, against Mr. Charles Thomas Orme Alford Wright who died during the pendency of the suit whereafter Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 herein (Defendant Nos. 3 & 4) were brought on record as his heirs and legal representatives. It was asserted in the suit that the original Defendant No. 1 was the absolute owner of 4.80 acres of land in Survey No. H-48A in R.S. No. 332/1 of Coonoor Rural Village. He had entered into an agreement of sale with Respondent No. 3 (Defendant No. 2) on 12th November, 1995 agreeing to sell the said property either to the second Defendant or its nominees. It is further asserted by the Appellant (Plaintiff) that in furtherance of the said agreement to sell the second Defendant was put in possession of the property agreed to be sold, in part performance of the agreement of sale and that fact has been recited in the agreement of sale itself. The agreement also authorized the second Defendant, at its discretion, ........