KIKKERI GOWDA Vs. SANNANANJEGOWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal is by the plaintiff in O.S.No.73/1992 on the file of Civil Judge, Jr.Dn. Krishnarajapet. He has challenged the judgment and decree, dtd. 9/8/2005 of the Prl. Civil Judge, Sr.Dn, Srirangapatna reversing the judgment of the trial court in a suit for specific performance instituted by him.

(2.) The plaintiff/appellant's case is that the defendants executed an agreement of sale in his favour for selling 18 guntas of land in Sy.No.106/7 of Harikalale village, Kasaba Hobli, Krishnarajpet, Mandya District for a total sale consideration of Rs.12,150.00, and by receiving an amount of Rs.8,150.00, the defendants put him in possession of the said property (referred to as suit property hereafter). The defendants undertook to obtain Khata in their names as early as possible and execute the sale deed. But they did not execute the sale deed. The plaintiff therefore caused a legal notice issued to the defendants on 25/9/1991 and demanded execution of the sale deed by receiving the balance sale consideration. Since the defendants did not execute the sale deed, and rather issued an evasive reply, the plaintiff brought the suit for specific performance. He pleaded his readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract.

(3.) The 2nd defendant filed written statement denying the execution of the sale agreement and receipt of advance amount of Rs.8,150.00 and also putting the plaintiff in possession of the suit property. He denied that defendants were under an obligation to execute the sale deed. They specifically contended that the agreement provided for refund of advance amount along with another Rs.8,000.00 in case they failed to execute the registered sale deed and because of this clause, the plaintiffs could not have instituted a suit for specific performance.