NARASAMMA Vs. NIRANNANILATHA MOMMEN JOHN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 19th March, 2005 in o. S. 1020/1995 on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge Sr. Dn.) Bangalore Rural District, bangalore.

(2.) THE case of the plaintiff is that, she entered into a contract of sale on 31. 3. 1995 with the defendant in respect of the land measuring 1 acre 30 guntas in Sy. No. 1 of Nalluruhalli Village krishnarajapuram hobli, Bangalore for consideration of Rs. 16 lakhs per acre. On the date of agreement, a sum of Rs. 5,60,000/- was paid towards advance and a further amount of Rs. 5 lakhs was paid on 10. 6. 1995. In all the plaintiff had paid Rs. 10,60,000/- to the defendant under the agreement. The defendant was required to obtain necessary clearance from the income tax authorities and also no objection from the appropriate authority under the provisions of Income tax Act and the Rules made thereunder in order to finalise and complete the sale transaction.

(3.) IT is further averred by the plaintiff, that she was always ready and willing to perform her part of contract, Plaintiff had made frequent demand for performance of the contract by the defendant, however the defendant went on postponing. Plaintiff on 31. 8. 1995 through a telegraphic communication requested the defendant to fulfil his obligation under the contract and further informing that the plaintiff is ready and willing to perform her part of contract. The defendant who was in receipt of the telegraphic communication called upon the plaintiff over phone and informed that he would obtain the requisite sanction needed for finalising the sale transaction and he would also place into the hands of the plaintiff the original documents of title and possession, establishing the fact of good and marketable title in favour of the defendant. On 6. 9. 1995 the defendant had called upon the plaintiff, inter alia informing that he would furnish all the details. It is also alleged by the plaintiff that the plaintiff had kept ready a demand draft drawn in favour of the defendant on 6. 9. 19995, from Vysya Bank, St. Marks Road, Bangalore for a sum of Rs. 10,60,000/- and had kept a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- cash as desired by the defendant. Though 6. 9. 1995 date was fixed for execution of the sale deed, defendant did not turn up at all as promised by him earlier. As such plaintiff got the demand draft cancelled on 11. 9. 1995. The defendant at that point of time, while deeply regretting for the inconvenience caused to the plaintiff, on 16. 9. 1995 agreed and undertake to complete the sale transaction during the first week of December 1995. However the defendant during the beginning of first week of November 1995 wanted the plaintiff to pay the price calculated @ Rs. 20,00,000/- per acre as against the sale price of Rs. 16 lakhs per acre. Feeling that the said demand is illegal the plaintiff did not agree to the same. Taking advantage of this, to the utter shock, surprise and dismal to the plaintiff, the defendant issued a notice of terminating the contract by making false, frivolous and baseless allegations. Thus the plaintiff filed the present suit.