Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Closure intimation in Shankari Pandiyan vs Ramachandra Murthy on 12 January, 2024Matching Fragments
37. Ex.P.14 was relied on by the defendant to contend that plaintiffs' failure to get the sale deed executed compelled the defendant to sell another property in order to repay the loan to KSFC under One Time Settlement and purpose of Ex.P.1 is frustrated. Ex.D.6 letter dated 16.01.2006 by KSFC in favour of defendant, Ex.D.7 letter dated 02.02.2006 by defendant to KSFC, Ex.D.8 letter dated 22.03.2006 by KSFC to defendant, Ex.D.9 letter dated 27.04.2006 by defendant to KSFC, Exs.D.10 and D.11 demand drafts, Ex.D.12 receipt by KSFC and Ex.D.13 letter by KSFC intimating closure of loan though have proximity to Ex.D.14 Sale deed, the averments in Ex.D.14 would not indicate or prove that property under Ex.D.14 was sold only for the purpose of repayment of loan and such sale necessitated due to failure of the plaintiffs to complete the contract in terms of Ex.P.1. Therefore, such contention cannot be accepted.