N MANI Vs. R S MAHADEVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Plaintiff in the original suit O.S. No. 240/2007 on the file of the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Kodaikanal is the Appellant in the second appeal. The Respondent herein was the Defendant in the said suit.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the second appeal are as follows: An agreement was entered into between the Appellant/Plaintiff and Respondent/Defendant on 21.07.2004 under Ex.A1. Under the said agreement the Respondent/Defendant agreed for selling the Silver Oak trees standing in his land having an extent of 11.00 acres comprised in Survey No. 1264 of Oothapallam, Pannaikadu village, Kodaikanal Taluk, for a sum of Rs. 7,70,001/-. On the date of agreement itself a sum of Rs. 1,00,001/- was paid by the Appellant herein/Plaintiff to the Respondent herein/Defendant. In the said agreement conditions were imposed to the effect that the purchaser, namely the Appellant/Plaintiff, should apply for and get the necessary cutting orders within six months from the date of agreement and thereafter should cut and remove the silver oak trees within six months so far as practicable. Since the silver oak trees sought to be sold were standing in the coffee estate of the Respondent/Defendant, certain conditions as to how the trees were to be cut without causing damage to the coffee plantation were also incorporated. Subsequent to the agreement on 15.09.2004 a sum of Rs. 50,000/- and on 03.10.2004 a further sum of Rs. 50,000/- were paid by the Appellant herein/Plaintiff and necessary endorsements were obtained in Ex.A1-agreement for the said payment. Thus, totally a sum of Rs. 2,00,001/- was paid as advance and part payment of the sale consideration of the silver oak trees.

(3.) According to the Appellant herein/Plaintiff he had some difficulties in getting the cutting orders from the government, though the Respondent/Defendant had signed all the documents to enable the Appellant/Plaintiff to apply for such cutting order and that when the Appellant/Plaintiff was about to get the cutting orders, the Respondent/Defendant unilaterally cancelled the agreement by issuing Ex.A2-letter on 24.08.2007 and enclosing a demand draft for a sum of Rs. 2,00,001/- purporting to repay the advance amount received by the Respondent/Plaintiff. Contending that the unilateral cancellation of the agreement was invalid and not binding upon the Appellant/Plaintiff, the Appellant/Plaintiff chose to file the suit not for the relief of specific performance but for a declaration that the cancellation of the agreement was invalid and for a consequential injunction not to prevent the Appellant/Plaintiff from cutting and removing the silver oak trees in terms of Ex.A1-Agreement.