VARGHESE @ KUNJU Vs. TONY ZACHARIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main prayer in this Original Petition (Civil) filed under the enabling provisions contained in Article 227 of the Constitution of India is as follows :

(2.) Heard Sri.G.Bhagavat Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/judgment debtor and Sri.S.Manu, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/decree holder.

(3.) The petitioner herein is the judgment debtor in E.P.No.41/2015 and the defendant in O.S.No.399/2013 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kottayam. The said Original Suit was filed by the respondent herein seeking a decree for realisation of Rs. 19.08lakhs together with interest @12% per annum on the principal amount of Rs. 18 lakhs from 6.12.2013 till realisation charged on the plaint schedule property. According to the respondent, he had entered into an agreement for sale of the plaint schedule property with the petitioner on 6.6.2013. It was agreed that the respondent will have to pay Rs. 2 lakhs per cent to the extent measured and the execution of the sale deed was to be effected within six months. The petitioner herein had received Rs. 18 lakhs on the date of agreement i.e., 6.6.2013, as advance towards the total sale consideration which was agreed to be fixed after measuring the property. However, the petitioner had failed to take any steps to discharge his obligations under the agreement and had executed the sale deed in favour of the respondent even after repeated demands, etc. Later on enquiry, the respondent came to know that the petitioner had sold 2.94 Ares of the property proposed to be sold to the respondent, after sale agreement with the respondent was executed. Hence it is alleged in the suit that the petitioner herein had failed to perform his part of the agreement and had willfully committed breach of contract and that he ought to have executed the sale deed on or before 5.6.2013 and that the respondent was already willing and ready to perform his part to execute the sale deed, etc. The suit was filed for return of the purchase money advanced to the petitioner on the date of the execution of the agreement. The petitioner had entered appearance before the court below and had filed written statement. Later, the suit was referred to the Lok Adalath for settlement. Ext.P-3 compromise petition dated 19.12.2014 was entered into between the parties and Ext.P-4 award was duly rendered by the Lok Adalath, Kottayam, in terms of the provisions contained in the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Ext.P-3 dated 19.12.2014 is the copy of the conditions of the said compromise reached between the parties, which read as follows : VERNACULAR MATTER