S JEEVARATHINAM Vs. BALAKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S.No.92 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Tindivanam is the appellant herein. The respondent is the defendant in the suit. The said suit was filed for specific performance of contract of sale allegedly entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant on 15.06.2008. The trial Court by decree and judgment dated 21.12.2011 declined to grant the decree for specific performance and instead, directed the defendant to repay the advance money of Rs.5,00,000/- to the plaintiff within a period of three months. As against the same, the defendant filed an appeal in A.S.No.18 of 2012 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Villupuram. The First Appellate Court by decree and judgment dated 26.11.2013 allowed the appeal and set aside the decree and judgment of the trial Court. Challenging the same, the plaintiff is before this Court with this second appeal.

(2.) This second appeal has come up today for admission. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and I have also perused the records carefully.

(3.) The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant is the absolute owner of the suit property. On 15.06.2008, the defendant entered into a sale agreement with the plaintiff by which, the defendant agreed to sell the suit properties for a total sale consideration of Rs.5,25,000/-On the date of execution of sale agreement itself, the plaintiff paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the defendant as advance. The balance sale consideration was only Rs.25,000/-. Incorporating the said terms and conditions, the sale agreement was executed and the same was registered in the office of the Sub Registrar. From the date of sale agreement itself, the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of contract. But, the defendant did not come forward to perform his part of contract. Therefore, the plaintiff filed the present suit for specific performance.