Supreme Court dismisses appeal, upholds Kerala High Court's judgment in property sale dispute
Justices Vikram Nath & PK Mishra [08-07-2024]

Read Order: R. RADHAKRISHNA PRASAD v. SWAMINATHAN & ANR[SC- CIVIL APPEAL NO. 910 OF 2024]

LE Correspondent

New Delhi, July 8, 2024: The Supreme Court today dismissed an appeal filed against the Kerala High Court's decision in a property sale dispute case.

The case involved an agreement dated March 26, 1998, wherein the defendant, Swaminathan, agreed to sell a property to the plaintiff, R. Radhakrishna Prasad, for a consideration of Rs. 30,00,000. According to the agreement, Swaminathan received an advance payment of Rs. 3,00,000 from Prasad and was to hand over the vacant possession of the property within six months.

However, Swaminathan allegedly received an additional amount of Rs. 15,00,000 from Prasad between March 26, 1998, and September 12, 1998, to clear his liabilities with a bank. Prasad filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement, claiming that he was ready to pay the balance sale consideration, but Swaminathan failed to execute the sale deed. Alternatively, Prasad sought a refund of the advance payment of Rs. 18,00,000 along with interest and other expenses.

The Trial Court found the agreement to be genuine and directed Swaminathan to refund Rs. 18,00,000 to Prasad. However, the Kerala High Court, in an appeal filed by Swaminathan, modified the decree and allowed Prasad to recover only Rs. 3,00,000 with 12% interest per annum from the date of the suit.

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, noted that the execution of the agreement was proved, and the only issue to be decided was whether Prasad had proved the payment of Rs. 18,00,000 to Swaminathan. The Top Court observed that while the payment of Rs. 3,00,000 was duly proved, the evidence for the additional payment of Rs. 15,00,000 was not convincing.

The Apex Court agreed with the High Court's findings that Prasad's claim of the subsequent payment of Rs. 15,00,000 was not established by positive evidence. Consequently, the Supreme Court found no substance in the appeal and dismissed it.