MOLLY AJITHKUMAR Vs. VIMALA SASIDHRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition is filed by respondent No.2 in E.P.No. 149 of 2006 in O.S.No. 496 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the Additional Munsiff of Alappuzha. By the order impugned, the objections to the execution raised by the petitioner were rejected by the court below.

(2.) On 15.2.2005, an agreement for sale was executed between Prabhakaran (second respondent) and Vimala Sasidharan (first respondent). As per the terms of the agreement, Prabhakaran agreed to sell an item of property having an extent of 9 cents in favour of Vimala for a consideration of 7 lakhs. An advance of 4,50,000/- was paid to the seller. Under the agreement, the time for performance was agreed to be on or before 17.8.2005.

(3.) Even before the time stipulated forcompleting the transaction, Vimala filed O.S.No.496 of 2005 on the file of the court of the Additional Munsiff, Alappuzha against Prabhakaran for an injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the plaint schedule property to strangers, contrary to the terms Of the agreement for sale. The suit was filed on 27.7.2005. On 27.8.2005, the parties to the suit entered into a compromise. A compromise decree was passed in terms of the compromise. As per the compromise, a sum of 1,80,000/- was paid back by the vendor to the vendee. It was agreed that the vendor need not execute the assignment deed in favour of the vendee (Vimala). The vendor agreed to return the balance amount of 2,70,000/- to Vimala within a period of six months. It was also agreed that on failure to pay the aforesaid amount of 2,70,000/-, the vendor has to pay interest at 12%, per annum on that amount and that the property in question would be a charge for such amount.