SACHIDANANDA ALVA Vs. SRIDHARA ALVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein had instituted a suit in O.S.No.24/2006 (old No.76/2004) against the respondents herein in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & J.M.F.C., Bantwal, D.K. (henceforth for brevity referred to as 'the Trial Court') for recovery of money.

(2.) The summary of the case of the plaintiff in the Trial Court was that, there was an agreement between himself and the defendants entered into on 210.2002 in respect of the property in dispute. The defendants had agreed to pay him a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- in lieu of he foregoing his right in the suit schedule property. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was paid to him on the date of agreement. The balance of Rs.2,00,000/- was to be paid in two installments i.e., Rs.1,00,000/- on or before 21.10.2003 and the remaining amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was to be paid on or before 21.10.2004. The defendants failed to pay Rs.1,00,000/-, which was due on 21.10.2003. Inspite of repeated requests, demands and issuance of legal notice dated 4.12003 also, the defendants failed to comply the demand. Hence, the plaintiff was constrained to file a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,00,875/- from the defendants with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization.

(3.) The second defendant filed her written statement wherein she denied the plaint averment about the defendants executing any agreement dated 22.10.2002 in favour of the plaintiff agreeing to pay him a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-. On the other hand, she contended that the first defendant had executed a registered settlement deed dated 24.9.2002 and since then, she is in actual possession as absolute owner of the suit schedule property. She also contended that the agreement relied upon by the plaintiff is barred under the provisions of the Contract Act, Hindu Law and Transfer of Property Act and the agreement is not legally enforceable in the eyes of law.