K. RAJENDRAN Vs. K. CHINNAPPA GOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal Suit has been directed against the Judgment and decree dated 31.07.2003 passed in Original Suit No.33 of 2002 by the District Court, Karur.

(2.) The first respondent herein as plaintiff has instituted Original Suit No.33 of 2002 on the file of the trial Court praying to pass a decree of specific performance, wherein the second respondent and appellant herein have been shown as defendants.

(3.) The material averments made in the plaint are that the suit property is comprised in Survey No.2237, Andangovil Keelpaham Village, Karur District and the same is the absolute property of the first defendant by virtue of purchase dated 13.09.1985. On 06.01.2001 the first defendant has agreed to sell the suit property in favour of the plaintiff at the rate of Rs.18,500/- per cent and to that extent, the suit sale agreement dated 06.01.2001 has come into existence. On the date of suit sale agreement, the first defendant has received a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- by way of an advance and agreed to execute a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff on or before 15.04.2001. The first defendant has agreed to measure the suit property before 15.04.2001. The plaintiff has always been ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. But the first defendant has evaded to measure the suit property and execute a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. Since the first defendant has failed to perform her part of the contract, the plaintiff has chosen to issue a legal notice dated 26.04.2001 to the first defendant. The first defendant has refused to receive the same. On 07.05.2001, the plaintiff has given a telegram to the first defendant on 16.05.2001. The plaintiff has issued another legal notice to the first defendant. After receipt of telegram dated 07.05.2001, the first defendant has given a reply notice dated 23.05.2001 and the same contains false allegations. In the counter filed by the first defendant in I.A.No.349 of 2001, it is stated that the first defendant has created a sham and nominal document in favour of the second defendant. Under the said circumstances, the present Suit has been instituted for the relief sought for in the plaint.