TMT. SUBA SRI MANI Vs. TMT. S. SARASWATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition arises out of the judgment and decree rendered in A.S. No. 38 of 1986, which in turn arose out of the judgment and decree rendered in O.S. No. 911 of 1983. The defendant in the suit is the petitioner herein. O.S. No. 911 of 1983 was filed by the respondent herein for return of documents of title deeds.

(2.) The facts of this revision are briefly as follows the plaintiff/respondent herein is the owner of the property situate at Teacher's Colony .comprised in R.S. No. 19/2 and T.S. Nos. 25. 29.30 and31 (parts) in block No. 21 at Pallilattu, Adyar, Madras-20. The petitioner herein entered into an agreement of sale to purchase this property from the respondent. The sale agreement was executed on 28-11-1981. The sale consideration was Rs. 1,63,000.00. A sum of Rs. 6,000 was paid by way of advance, on the date of execution of the sale agreement. The sale transaction should be completed within 3 months from the date of agreement of sale. Soon after the sale agreement was executed, the respondent herein, delivered the title deed to the petitioner herein which are set out in Schedule II in the plaint. It was agreed between the parties that the petitioner here in should obtain the encumbrance certificate for 13 years. The petitioner herein also applied for the same. Thereafter, the petitioner herein did not evince any interest in completing the sale transaction within, the time stipulated. Therefore the respondent herein requested the petitioner to ex tend the time for completing the sale transaction. The petitioner also paid a further advance of Rs. 4,000. The time was extended by one month.

(3.) But even after the extension of time the petitioner was unable to complete the sale transaction. While the matter stood, thus the petitioner sent a letter through her counsel dated 16.3.1982 staling that the sale could not be completed since the respondent herein failed to produce the en-cumbrance certificate and the title deed. Immediately the respondent herein sent a reply and filed the suit for return of the documents. The trial court dismissed the suit and the first appellate court on appeal reversed the judgment and decree of the trial court allowed the appeal and decreed the suit. It is against this judgment and decree, the present revision has been filed by the defendant in the suit.