CHIKKANAN Vs. A R PERUMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second plaintiff who failed before the first appellate Court is the appellant.

(2.) THE second plaintiff is the son-in-law and the plaintiffs 3 to 5 are the legal representatives of the deceased first plaintiff. Originally, the plaintiffs 1 and 2 filed the suit for specific performance of the suit agreement for sale dated 29. 6. 1977 executed by the defendants 1 to 3/respondents 1 to 3 herein in respect of the suit property for a sum of Rs. 8,000/ -. THE respondents/defendants resisted the suit on the ground that the said agreement is not true and valid and that the same had been forged to lay an unlawful claim by the plaintiffs. In the above circumstances, the trial Court having framed 7 issues, held on the basis of the evidence both oral and documentary adduced on either side that the suit agreement is true and valid and that therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief as prayed for.

(3.) THE defendants 2 and 3 herein attained majority pending trial of the suit and therefore they filed a separate written statement containing similar averments as in the statement filed by the first defendant. THEy have also stated that since the suit agreement even if true is not binding on them as there was no necessity for selling the share of the then minor defendants 2 and 3 in the suit property.