BABU CHIRAYIL Vs. MATHEW MATHEW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in a suit for money is the appellant. The claim is for brokerage with respect to sale of immovable property.

(2.) "Vijaya Estate" having an extent of approximate 75 acres belonged to the defendants. For sale of the property, the plaintiff agreed to act as a broker. According to the plaintiff, the defendants agreed to pay commission at the rate of 2% of the consideration. The plaintiff found out a purchaser for the property viz. one Mohammed Abdul Khader, with whom the defendants entered into Ext. A1 agreement for sale dated 20.03.1995. The period fixed for performance was six months. The total consideration fixed was Rs. 2,32,62,400/- at the rate of Rs. 3,10,000/- per acre. On the date of Ext. A1, Rs. 25 lakhs was paid towards advance sale consideration. The brokerage of Rs. 50,000/- for the said amount was paid. The plaintiff alleges that though a further advance of Rs. 25 lakhs was paid pursuant to Ext. A1, his commission was not paid. In pursuance to Ext. A1 agreement and on his intervention, the entire property was conveyed by the defendants. However, the agreed brokerage was not paid. It is accordingly that the suit is filed.

(3.) The defendants admitted that the plaintiff acted as a broker for entering into Ext. A1 agreement for sale. However, it was contended that sale of the property did not effectuate in terms of Ext. A1. On receipt of further advance of Rs. 25 lakhs from Abdul Khader under Ext. A1, the brokerage with respect to the same, amounting to Rs. 50,000/-, was paid to the plaintiff. Since the sale of the property could not be effected by the plaintiff acting as a broker, the plaintiff is not entitled to any further amount, is the contention of the defendants.