(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the appellant finally in respect of the appeal preferred by the L.Rs of the 1st defendant calling in question the concurrent findings of the courts below.
(2.) BRIEF facts are that the 1st respondent plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance basing on the agreement of sale Ex.P1 dated 9.11.95 and it was the case of the plaintiff that the 1st defendant Smt. Siddaramakka agreed to sell the suit land for Rs. 55.000/ - and received Rs. 40,000/ - on the date of the agreement and agreed to receive the balance amount of Rs. 15,000/ - at the time of execution of the sale deed. However, the 1st respondent did not live up to her promise and on the other hand, after fighting for the possession of her land right up to the Supreme Court where she finally succeeded, the 1st respondent plaintiff however sold the suit property to the 3rd defendant K.G. Srinivas by suppressing the aforesaid agreement and the said Srinivas sold some portion of it to the 4th defendant D.T. Ramanna. Therefore, the plaintiff made all of them as parties and sought for specific performance of agreement of sale.
(3.) BASED on the said stand taken by the parties, the trial court framed as many as two issues and two additional issues. After evidence appreciation, learned trial judge decreed the suit of the respondent -plaintiff in part to the extent of refund of earnest money of Rs. 40,000/ - with 6% interest.