(1.) Defendant is the appellant. Suit was instituted for specific performance of an agreement for sale of A1 dated 12.10.1982. The agreement was executed by the defendant along with his brother Pulendran and Govindan. Plaint schedule house and compound is having an extent of 20 cents. Total sale consideration was Rs.1,45,200/-. An advance amount of Rs.20,000/- was paid on the date of the execution of the agreement. Defendant and his two brothers had also undertaken to evict the tenants residing in the property. It was agreed that the transaction be completed by 30th August 1983. While so, Pulendran surrendered his one - third share over the plaint schedule property in favour of Govindan. Govindan then executed assignment deed in respect of his 2/3rd share on 26.8.1986 to the plaintiff. Afterwards by instalments plaintiff had paid to the defendant and his two brothers a sum of Rs.1,05,000/- thereby making a total payment of Rs.1,25,000/-. However, the defendant was not prepared to perform his part of the contract. Hence the suit was instituted seeking a decree for specific performance of the agreement by defendant after receiving Rs.6,667/- his share of the balance consideration.
(2.) Suit was resisted by the defendant. Receipt of the further sum of Rs.1,05,000/- was denied by him. He contended that he had subscribed his signature in some of the papers taken to him by his brother Govindan and those papers might have been utilised for preparing the agreement and the receipt. Trial Court after considering the oral and documentary evidence came to the conclusion that A1 is genuine document, but denied the relief for the reason that the defendant had not received any consideration on the date of the agreement or thereafter and the agreement is not enforceable against one of the coowners. Aggrieved by the same plaintiff approached this Court and filed A.S.207/87. A learned single Judge of this Court allowed the appeal and directed the defendant to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of his one - third share over the plaint schedule property on receiving Rs.6,667/- being his share of the balance consideration and put the plaintiff in full possession of the property. Defendant is aggrieved by the said judgment and has preferred this appeal.
(3.) The following substantial questions of law are raised by the defendant.