SANKARAN Vs. KUPPA GOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second defendant who has lost before the first Appellate Court has come forward with the instant Second Appeal.

(2.) THIS appeal has arisen in this way: " Subbarayan, the first defendant before the trial Court is admittedly the owner of the property in dispute. According to the plaintiff, Kuppa Gounder, Subbarayan the first defendant had entered into an agreement with him for sale of the property to the plaintiff for a consideration of Rs. 75 per cent extent, the total extent of the property being 25 cents. According to him, Rs. 300/- was paid as advance on the date of the agreement and one month's time was fixed for payment of balance of Rs. 1,575/- and to complete the sale transaction. According to the plaintiff, the first defendant committed breach of contract. He had not come forward to execute the sale deed. On the other hand, he had sold the property to the second defendant on 6.9.1980. The second defendant Sankaran had purchased the property with full knowledge of the existence of the agreement dated 4.9.1980 in favour of the plaintiff. Pleading so, the plaintiff has instituted O.S. No. 672 of 1980 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Dindivanam for the relief of specific performance.

(3.) RATNAM, J. as he then was, formulated the following point: "whether the Lower Appellate Court was right in its conclusion that the appellant is not a bona fide purchaser for value, is the substantial question of law that arises for consideration in this Second Appeal."