Y A KADER Vs. MUTHULAKSHMI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these appeals are by one Y. A. Kader, A. S. No. 54 of 1980 is against the Judgment and Decree in O. S. No. 84 of 1977, A. S. No. 351 of 1985 is against the Judgment and Decree in O. S. No. 85 of 1977, A. S. No. 380 of 1985 is against the Judgment and decree in O. S. No. 18 of 1978 and A. S. No. 408 of 1985 is against the Judgment and Decree in O. S. No. 19 of 1978; all the said suits were on the file of the Subordinate Judge of Mayuram. The Appellant Y.A. Kader herein is the Plaintiff in D. S. Nos. 18 of 1978 and 19 of 1978 and defendant in O. S. No. 84 of 1977 and O. S. No. 85 of 1977. O. S. Nos. 84 and 85 of 1977 are for possession and mesne profits. O. S. No. 84 of 1977 was filed by one Mathulakshmi, the 1st Respondent in A. S. No. 54 of 1980. She having died pending A. S. No. 54 of 1980, her three legal representatives were brought on record as Respondents 2 to 4 in the said A. S. No. 54 of 1980. Likewise, in the view of the joint memo dated 17-7-1991, in A. S. No. 380 of 1985 also the same three are hereby brought on record as legal representatives of the deceased Respondent Muthulakshmi Ammal. O. S. No. 85 of 1977 was filed by the above referred to Muthulakshmi and the 3 children of one Savithiri Ammal, who are respondents 2 to 4 in A. S. No. 54 of 1980. The said three persons are Respondents 2, 3 and 4 in A. S. No. 351 of 1985 and they have also been recorded as legal representatives of the deceased 1st Respondent. Muthulakshmi Ammal. In O. S. No. 84 of 1977 possession was claimed with reference to 4.73 1/2 acres of land. In O. S. No. 85 of 1977 possession was claimed with reference to another land, whose extent is 1.81 acres. O. S. Nos. 18 and 19 of 1978 were filed by the Appellant herein for specific performance of the contract of sale of the lands involved in the above referred to O. S. No. 84 1977. While O. S. No. 18 of 1978 was against the above said Muthulakshmi alone, O. S. No. 19 of 1978 was filed against the said Muthulakshmi and 3 children of Savithiri Ammal (Respondents in A. S. No. 54 of 1980) and was for specific performance of another contract of sale of the lands involved in the above said O. S. No. 85 of 1977. All these suits were tried together as they are connected with each other and common evidence was recorded.

(2.) O. S. Nos. 84 and 85 of 1977 for possession came to be filed in the following circumstances:- Admittedly two sale agreements were executed on 19-6-1974. One is Ex. A. 1. It was executed by the Plaintiff in O. S. No. 84 of 1977 in favour of the above said Kader, the appellant. The other is Ex. A. 2, executed by the above said Savithiri Aammal, who died subsequently, in favour of the above said same Kader. By the former agreement, 8.71 acres of wet lands were agreed to be sold for Rs. 65325/- at the rate of Rs. 25/ - per kuli. In the latter agreement 1.81 acres of wet lands were agreed to be sold for Rs. 13,575/- at the same rate. Under each of the said agreement, a sum of Rs. 2000/- was paid as advance. Further, possession of the respective lands was also handed over to the buyer, the above said Kader on the same date. Further, in respect of the above said Ex. A. 1 sale agreement, subsequent to the said sale agreement, on 18-12-1974 sale deed was executed with reference to 3.97 1/2 acres. This is out of the above said 8.71 acres and the above said portion covered a consideration of Rupees 36187/- out of the above said total consideration of Rs. 65325/- under the sale agreement. With reference to the above facts, there is no dispute between the parties.

(3.) While so, according to the Plaintiffs, with reference to the balance 4.73 1/2 acres, the said Kader did not come forward to pay the balance price and get the sale deed executed, despite the fact that the sale agreement provided that within six months of the date of sale agreement, the sale should be completed and despite the fact that the Vendor reminded Kader to perform his part of the contract, by even sending Ex. A. 3 notice dated 20-1-1977. Further, according to the Plaintiff in O. S. No. 84 of 1977, even though the Appellant Kader sent a reply Ex. A.5 dated 26-1-1977, he did not come forward to pay the balance price and hence by Ex. A. 10 dated 24-2-1977, the said plaintiff terminated the contract on the ground that the Appellant was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and filed the suit O. S. No. 84 of 1977 claiming back possession of the above referred to 4.73 1/2 acres out of the total 8.71 acres. In the other suit O. S. No. 85 of 1977 also according to the Plaintiffs therein, the defendant Kader did not come forward to pay the balance sale price, viz., Rs.11575/- despite the fact that even in the sale agreement relating thereto, the same six months period was stipulated as the period within the sale should be completed. In this case also possession of the land was admittedly handed over to Kader on 19-6-l974 itself. Here again, according to the said plaintiffs, despite the reminders sent by them, Kader did not come forward to pay the balance price and get the sale deed. The above said Ex. A.10 terminates Ex. A.2 contract also for the same reason. That is why O. S. No. 85 of 1977 has been filed for possession of the above said 1.81 acres of land.