KOLLIPARA SRIRAMULU vs T. ASWATHANARAYANA & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that an oral agreement to sell 137 shares in a site was binding despite the absence of a formal document and an agreed mode of payment. The Court clarified that a mere reference to a future formal contract does not negate the existence of a binding agreement unless it is clear that the parties intended not to be bound until a formal contract was signed. The Court upheld the High Court's decision that the appellant was not a purchaser without notice regarding the 39 shares, and ruled that the High Court was correct in directing the allotment of the site to the respondent under the Partition Act, 1893, Section 2.