(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 29 -01 -1981 passed by the learned Judge, Court No. 17, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in Civil Suit No. 376 of 1980, by which the learned Judge dismissed the suit of the appellant for specific performance of agreement dated 02 -03 -1979. It is further directed that respondent No. 1 shall refund the amount of Rs. 5,000/ - (Rupees Five Thousand Only) together with 6% interest from the date of the suit till realization of the amount of the plaintiff.
(2.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Judge, the present appeal is preferred by the appellant contending inter alia that the learned Trial Court has erred on evidence on record and facts of the case in dismissing the suit of the appellant. The Trial Court has committed error in holding that the appellant is not entitled to the specific performance of agreement dated 02 -03 -1979 for want of readiness and willingness on his part. The learned Judge has committed error in drawing inference that the appellant was not ready and willing to perform his part by misreading the plaint as well as evidence on record of the case. The learned Judge misconstrued and misinterpreted the provisions of sub -section (c) of Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act by holding that specific performance of contract cannot be enforced in favour of person who fails to prove that he had performed or he is ready and willing to perform his part of contract. The learned Trial Court has not properly appreciated various documents produced before it in its true perspective while dismissing the suit of the appellant. Thus, the learned Advocate submitted that considering the entire gamut of oral deposition and documentary evidence, the appeal deserves to be allowed and the order passed by the learned Judge be quashed and set aside.
(3.) LEARNED Advocate Mr. K. J. Vyas for the respondents is not present. Nevertheless, the matter is taken up for final disposal today in the interest of justice.