G.THANGASAMY Vs. D.RAJKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants in a suit for specific performance have preferred the present appeal challenging the decree for specific performance.

(2.) The defendants are the owners of the suit schedule property. They entered into a sale agreement on 22/8/2016 to alienate the property in favour of the plaintiff. The total sale consideration is Rs.1,01,25,000.00. Rs.5,00,000.00 was paid in cash as advance. A cheque for a sum of Rs.22,00,000.00 was paid in favour of the defendants for remitting the loan from the State Bank of India. It was agreed that the balance sale consideration of Rs.74,25,000.00 was to be paid within a period of three months. In the meantime, the property has to be measured with the help of a Government Surveyor in the presence of the plaintiff and the defendants should have redeemed the property.

(3.) The plaintiff had issued a legal notice on 29/5/2017 calling upon the defendants to execute the sale deed after receiving the balance sale consideration. The defendants had sent a reply on 6/6/2017 contending that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract due to lack of funds arising out of demonetization. In the reply notice, it was further pointed out that the plaintiff had refused to perform his part of the contract on the ground that the property is an unapproved land. It was further pointed out in the reply notice that the plaintiff has sent a Whatsapp message to the defendants' son on 21/11/2016 intimating that he is not willing to proceed with the agreement and requesting for refund of the advance amount. In the reply notice, the defendants requested the plaintiff to get refund of the advance amount in instalments.