M.RANGASAMY Vs. APPACHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff in a suit for specific performance is the appellant before this Court.

(2.) The case of the appellant, as plaintiff in the suit was that the suit property belong to defendants 1 and 2 who had purchased the same from Srinivasa Naidu and others in and by sale deed dtd. 14/7/1978. The plaintiff entered into a sale agreement with the defendants 1 and 2 for a total sale consideration of Rs.68,539.00 in respect of 7 acres out of total 8.96 acres owned by defendants 1 and 2. According to the plaintiff, he paid an advance of Rs.10,000.00 and the balance was agreed to be paid on or before 1/2/1990 and thereafter the sale deed was to be executed. Though the plaintiff was ready and willing to pay the balance sale consideration according to the plaintiff, the defendants 1 and 2 were evading to execute the sale deed and demanding an enhanced rate and were also trying to create encumbrance to defeat the rights of the plaintiff. The plaintiff caused a lawyer's notice on 20/1/1990, calling upon them to receive the balance sale consideration and execute the sale deed in terms of the agreement and not to indulge in creating any further encumbrance over the property. They also caused a paper publication to such effect.

(3.) The defendants 1 and 2 replied to the said notice denying the sale agreement and claiming that they have executed only a mortgage in favour of the 3rd defendant which according to the plaintiff was a sham and nominal document created by the defendants 1 and 2 colluding with the 3rd defendant the mortgagee. The mortgagee has been arrayed as the 3rd defendant in the suit. According to the plaintiff, he is prepared to deposit the balance sale consideration as and when the Court directs and the suit is not barred by limitation having been filed on 5/4/1990.