SANTHOS KUMAR Vs. VARGHESE GEORGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants 1 to 4 are defendants 3 to 6 in OS 84 of 1979 of the Additional Sub-Court, Alleppey 5th appellant is the 1st defendant in the suit. The 1st respondent (plaintiff) filed the suit for specific performance of a contract for sale. The suit has been decreed by the Trial Court and defendants 1 and 2 on their own behalf and on behalf of minor defendants 3 to 6 are directed to execute the sale deed in respect of the plaint property in favour of the plaintiff on receiving the balance sale consideration recited in Ext.A3 within three months. Plaintiff is allowed to execute the decree in case defendants do not comply with the direction of the court. Defendants 1 and 2 were also restrained by injunction from executing the sale deed in respect of the property in favour of the 7th defendant or in favour of any other person.

(2.) The ranking of the parties as it stood before the Trial Court is followed in this judgment.

(3.) Plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of Ext.A3 agreement dated 5-3-1979 executed by defendants 1 and 2 on their behalf and representing minor defendants 3 to 6 in favour of the plaintiff for sale of the plaint schedule property for a consideration of Rs.14,500/-. It is the case of the plaintiff that he issued a notice through his lawyer expressing his willingness to purchase the property tendering the balance consideration and requesting defendants 1 and 2 to appear before the Sub Registry Office, Vennikulam at 10 a.m. on 26-3-1979 to execute the sale deed in accordance with the agreement and that the 1st defendant replied the notice admitting the execution of the agreement, but contending that the property is in the possession of a stranger under an oral lease. Plaintiff stated that he has been and is still ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement. It is also alleged in the plaint that defendants 1 and 2 had made preparations to alienate the property to the 7th defendant.