SAROJA AMMAL Vs. RANGASAMY KOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 2nd defendant in O.S.No.112 of 2005 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Kallakurichi, is the APPELLANT .

(2.) THE 1st respondent/ plaintiff entered into an agreement of sale with one Muthu Kounder the father of the appellant and the 2nd respondent on 28.10.1998 for purchasing the property belonging to Muthu Kounder for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- and advance of Rs.1,25,000/- was paid which was acknowledged in the agreement of sale. The said Muthu Kounder shall execute the sale deed whenever demanded by the 1st respondent/ plaintiff. Taking into consideration between the relationship between the parties the 1st respondent/ plaintiff made a demand on 14.10.2005 by issuing a notice calling upon the appellant and 2nd respondent to execute the sale deed as per the agreement of sale executed by Muthu Kounder and that was denied and therefore, the suit was filed for specific performance of agreement of sale.

(3.) BOTH the Courts below held that the agreement of sale was executed by Muthu Kounder in favour of the 1st respondent/ plaintiff and an advance of Rs.1,25,000/- was received by Muthu Kounder. Nevertheless, the Courts below declined to grant the relief of specific performance holding that the 1st respondent/plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and therefore he is not entitled to claim the relief of specific performance, though the claim is within the period of limitation. However, both the Courts granted the decree directing the appellant and the 2nd respondent to pay a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. This is challenged in the Second Appeal.