P RAMALINGAM PADAYATCHI Vs. MUTHIAH PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant is the appellant. THE plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance to execute the sale deed as per the agreement, ex. A. 1 dated 24. 12. 1985.

(2.) THE defendant contended that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, disputed the quantum of money paid as advance at the time of execution of Ex. A. 1, sale agreement. However, the trial court decreed the suit. THE defendant's first appeal was also dismissed. Hence this Second Appeal.

(3.) THE next contention of the learned counsel for the appellant/defendant is that Rs. 5,500/= was not paid at the time of executing ex. A. 1 sale agreement. In Ex. A. 1 itself it is stated that out of the sale price of Rs. 10,000/=, Rs. 5,500/= was paid as advance. But in the written statement, the defendant claimed that only Rs. 3,000/= was paid as advance and the plaintiff promised to pay Rs. 2500/= on the next day, but did not pay the money. But during the course of evidence, the defendant when examined as D. W. 1, stated that at the time of execution of Ex. A. 1, only Rs. 2500/= was paid and not rs. 3000/= as mentioned in the written statement.