SUBHASAPPA Vs. UJJAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are the defendants in O.S. No. 228/2009 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, Ranebennur. Being aggrieved by the order dated 19.02.2015, made on I.A. No. IX filed under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC, the petitioners have preferred this writ petition.

(2.) THE respondent herein has filed a suit seeking for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 09.08.1983. The case of the plaintiff is that, pursuant to the agreement of sale, he was put in possession of the suit schedule property and he effected vast improvement. In spite of repeated request, the defendants' have failed to execute the sale deed. The plaintiff got issued legal notice on 10.7.2009 calling upon the defendants to execute the sale deed. However, the defendants refused to execute the sale deed. Immediately thereafter, he filed the suit for specific performance of agreement of sale.

(3.) THE trial Court after considering the matter in detail held that according to Article 54 of Limitation Act, limitation counts from the date of refusal of the execution of agreement of sale. As per Article 54 of Limitation Act, the period for filing of suit for Specific Performance Contract is three years, if the date of performance is fixed. In the agreement of sale there is no mention of the specific date on which the defendants had to execute the sale deed. Accordingly, rejected the application filed by the defendants. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the defendants have preferred this writ petition.