MADHUSUDANAN Vs. SHIBU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant who succeeded before the trial court but was slapped with a decree by the lower appellate court for a sum of Rs.63,220/ - with 6% interest from 02.03.2006 till realisation is the appellant. By Ext.A1 agreement dated 11.10.2004, the defendant in the suit agreed to sell 11 cents of land as per two sale deeds namely, sale deed Nos.2023/88 and 2022/98. The price fixed was Rs.8200/ - per cent. As per the allegations in the plaint, a sum of Rs.73,220/ - was paid as advance and the sale deed was to be executed within a period of one year. Even though the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of contract, the defendant under one pretext or another postponed the execution and ultimately on 02.03.2006, Ext.A2 notice calling upon the defendant to execute the sale deed was issued by the plaintiff. A reply was issued containing false and untenable contentions. Therefore, suit was laid.

(2.) THE defendant resisted the suit. He denied the very transaction itself and contended that Ext.A1 is a forged document. According to the defendant, he came to know about the agreement only when he received Ext.A2 notice and he has sent a reply stating the entire facts. There is no cause of action for the plaintiff. On the basis of these contentions, he prayed for dismissal of the suit.

(3.) ON the above pleadings, issues were raised and the parties went to trial. The plaintiff examined PWs 1 to 3 and had Exts.A1 to A5 marked. The defendant did not chose to adduce any evidence.