THOMAS Vs. ABRAHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O.S. No. 512 of 1121 was a suit for specific performance of Ext. A, an udampady dated 29.4.1115, which was dismissed by the Trial Court and decreed in appeal by the learned District Judge of Mavelikkara. The questions argued before me in this second appeal by the 2nd defendant and his wife, the 3rd defendant, are:

(2.) Ext. A cannot possibily be hit by S.23 of the Contract Act as neither the consideration nor the object of the agreement

(3.) S.12 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 (S.11 of the Travancore Specific Relief Act, XIII of 1115), will not also avail the appellants in view of the Explanation to that Section which enacts that "unless and until the contrary is proved" compensation for the breach of contracts relating to immovable property cannot be an adequate remedy, and the absence of any evidence on record to rebut that statutory presumption.