V K RAJAMANICKA MUDALIAR Vs. J KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed against the judgment and decree passed by the lower Appellate Court in A.S.No.36 of 2005 which was filed by the appellant/plaintiff (respondent herein) against the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court in O.S.No.482 of 2003.

(2.) THE defendants 1 & 2 / respondents in the appeal are the Revision petitioners herein and the plaintiff / appellant is the respondent herein.

(3.) THE written statement filed by the first defendant and adopted by the second defendant would be as follows:- It is true that the sale deed was executed by the third defendant in favour of the second defendant on 05.12.2001 but the defendants never agreed to pay 2% of the sale price to the plaintiff, i.e. a total sum of Rs.22,000/- as brokerage commission. THE second defendant directly purchased the property from the third defendant and hence, the suit is barred by misjoinder of parties. THE first and the third defendants are residing in Gandhi Nagar and the first defendant and his son are also stamp vendors, and hence, there was no need for them to engage a house-broker for purchasing a house in the same area. THE plaintiff has failed to succeed in purchasing the property to his relatives and with that enmity he has filed this suit. THE first and the second defendants never engaged any broker much less the plaintiff to purchase the property of Gandhi Nagar and hence, the claim is unsustainable. THE first and the second defendants receive the notice and enquired the same with the plaintiff, who has stated that on the ill-advise of his relative in failing to purchase the property, he issued the false notice and hence, he tendered apology to the defendants and that he will drop the matter and will not proceed further. This is the reason as to why the defendants have not given any reply to the plaintiff. THE suit has been filed by the plaintiff only to harass the defendants. THErefore, the suit deserves to be dismissed.