A. THANGAVEL Vs. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IF the contention of the petitioner is to be believed, no sale deed will be safe and no purchaser will be safe. As an after thought after selling the property for a proper sale consideration and execute the sale deed as early as 13.05.2010, noting that the price of the property got appreciated, the petitioner gave a complaint, which was not rightly registered, has made the petitioner, to come to this Court.

(2.) THE petitioner was the owner of the property comprised in Survey No. 72, 73/10, 73/11 and 73/3 in Ambadurai Village, Dindigul Taluk. The said property was agreed to be sold by the petitioner to the fourth respondent, for a sale consideration of Rs. 60,00,000/ -. Believing the representation of the fourth respondent, the petitioner executed a sale deed, on the hope that the fourth respondent would set off the amount and balance consideration would be paid to the petitioner by the fourth respondent. Based on the assurance only, the petitioner executed the sale deed dated 13.05.2010. At the time of execution of the sale deed, a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/ - was paid to the petitioner. Subsequently, through 11 installments, including three installments by cheques, only a sum of Rs. 23,82,500/ - was paid. The balance sale consideration is only Rs. 36,17,500/ -. Since the sale deed was executed, without full payment of the sale price, no title can be conferred on the fourth respondent. Hence, the petitioner demanded the said price amount from the fourth respondent. As the fourth respondent refused to pay the balance amount, he gave a representation on 17.09.2011 to the higher authority and the second respondent conducted an enquiry, based on the order obtained by the petitioner in Crl. O.P. (MD). No. 8592 of 2012 dated 04.07.2012.

(3.) HEARD Mr. P. Senthur Pandian, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. P. Kandasamy, learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3.