JAYARAMAN; GIRISH Vs. HAMEED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 2² issues raised in these appeals are connected and therefore these cases were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) R.F.A.668/13 is filed by the defendants in O.S.558/09 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Palakkad. R.F.A.26/14 is also filed by the appellants in R.F.A.668/13, who are aggrieved by the judgment and decree dismissing O.S.522/10 filed by them against the respondent in R.F.A.668/13. F.A.O.321/13 is filed by the appellants in the aforesaid R.F.As, who are aggrieved by the order passed by the IInd Additional District Judge, Palakkad in I.A.1175/13 in A.S.83/13, which appeal was later withdrawn to this court and is numbered as RFA 26/14.

(3.) O.S.558/09 and O.S.522/10 are between the same parties and the subject matter being connected, these cases were disposed of by a common judgment. In so far as O.S.558/09 is concerned, the suit was filed by the respondent in the appeal seeking a decree of specific performance of Ext.A1 agreement for sale entered into between the respondent/plaintiff and the appellants/defendants whereby plaint schedule item Nos.1 to 7 were agreed to be sold to the plaintiffs. By the judgment and decree under appeal, the suit was decreed and the respondent plaintiff was directed to deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs.9,28,000/- within two months and the appellants were ordered to execute a sale deed at the cost and expense of the plaintiff within one month from the date of receipt of notice of deposit.