S SELVARAJ Vs. K BALCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendants' appeal. The present respondent as a plaintiff had instituted a suit against the present appellant, arraigning him as defendant in O.S.No.51/2014, in the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge and Principal J.M.F.C. at K.G.F. (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "Trial Court"), seeking specific performance of a contract.

(2.) The summary of the case of the plaintiff in the Trial Court was that, the defendant has offered him to sell the suit schedule property to meet his legal and financial necessity and clear family debt. Accordingly, the negotiation took place between them on 5/9/2012. It was agreed in the negotiation that the defendant should sell the suit schedule property to the plaintiff for a total consideration of a sum of Rs.14,00,000.00. In that regard, both the plaintiff and the defendant entered into an agreement for sale on 27/3/2013, on the same day, the plaintiff paid an advance consideration in the sale value of a sum of Rs.10,00,000.00 to the defendant, which the defendant acknowledged. It was agreed between the parties that the defendant should execute the sale deed and register it in favour of the plaintiff within three months from the date of the agreement for sale after receiving the balance sale consideration of a sum of Rs.4,00,000.00. The defendant also agreed to handover the original documents as on the date of registration of sale deed.

(3.) In response to the summons served upon him, the defendant appeared through his counsel and filed his written statement. In his written statement, the defendant admitted as true that he is the owner in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and that he had purchased the same from his vendor, Sri P.M.Samuel under a registered document for a valuable consideration on 16/4/1977. He also admitted that thereafter, he put up construction of a dwelling house and shop premises, which is the suit schedule property. However, he denied all other averments made in the plaint as false and concocted. He denied that he had executed an agreement for sale in favour of the plaintiff and had received an advance amount of Rs.10,00,000.00. He also denied that a legal notice was issued to him by the plaintiff. He contended that the suit is barred by limitation and there is no cause of action for the suit. He denied that the plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract including getting the sale deed executed within three months. However, the defendant contended that he intended to dispose of the suit schedule property with a sole intention to clear his family debt as per the alleged agreement, as such, the selling of the property was inevitable and the consideration to clear his family debt and the plaintiff had not fulfilled the said covenant nor payment of amount within three months and thereby, the plaintiff has lost his right to enforce the alleged agreement dtd. 27/3/2013. He also contended that if the suit of the plaintiff is decreed, he would be put to great hardship and inconvenience. The suit schedule property is the only property for the defendant to reside. With this, he prayed for dismissal of the suit with exemplary costs.