ROBINSON Vs. ARUNADAS(DIED)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants 4 and 5 are the appellants.

(2.) The plaintiff filed O.S.No.53 of 1993 before the Sub Court Kuzhithurai for specific performance of an agreement of sale dtd. 2/1/1993. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court. The plaintiff filed A.S.No.8 of 1999 before the Additional District Court, Kanyakumari at Nagercoil. The learned First Appellate Judge partly decreed the suit to the extent of the share of the first defendant in the suit schedule property after depositing 50% of the sale consideration, but dismissed the suit with regard to the share of the second defendant. As against the same, the defendants 4 and 5 have filed the present second appeal.

(3.) The plaintiff had contended that the suit schedule properties are owned by the defendants 1 and 2. The third defendant is the husband of the second defendant. The plaintiff had further contended that on 2/1/1993, the first defendant and the third defendant after being authorised by the second defendant, executed an agreement for sale of the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff. According to the plaintiff, the sale consideration was fixed at Rs.65,000.00 and an advance amount of Rs.1000.00 was received by the defendants 1 and 2 on the date of the agreement. The period of agreement was fixed as three months to end of 31/3/1993. Though the plaintiff was ready with funds, the defendants have not come forward to execute the sale deed, a legal notice was issued on 18/2/1993. On 1/3/1993, the first defendant sent a reply that he has already sold the property to third party. After verification, the plaintiff came to know that the defendants 4 and 5 have purchased the suit schedule property from the defendants 1 and 2. Hence, the present suit for specific performance.