A.R. DINAKARAN Vs. B. SELVAKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant before the learned Single Judge is the appellant herein. The suit filed by the respondent seeking the relief of specific performance was decreed. Challenging the correctness of the judgment and decree of the learned Single Judge, this appeal has been preferred.

(2.) THE appellant herein is the owner of the suit property situated in Old Door No.47/30, New No.2/47, Anandavelu Mudali Street, Perambur, Chennai 600 011. An agreement was entered into between the parties on 31.05.2006 under Ex.P.1, by which, it was agreed that the suit property will be sold in favour of the respondent by the appellant for a total sum of Rs.47,25,000/ -. The advance of Rs.5 lakhs was also paid by the respondent and acknowledged in the agreement of sale itself.

(3.) THE appellant sent a notice dated 25.09.2006 under Ex.P.2 to the respondent, cancelling the agreement for sale unilaterally. Under the said document, the appellant has contended that the respondent had been taking steps to enter into another sale agreement for a higher sale price with respect to the suit property with a third party, which is illegal. The appellant came to know of this information through reliable sources. The respondent, by misinterpreting the sale agreement, as if it was a complete sale deed, had been receiving advance amount from various persons. Therefore, the legal notice was issued on the ground that the respondent was not prepared to complete the sale transaction within the meaning of clause 10 of the sale agreement, as he had already created a verbal encumbrance over the suit property by entering into an unlawful sale agreement with a third party.