G. KASI REDDIYAR Vs. K. RAVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants who suffered a decree for Specific Performance are the appellants. According to the plaintiff, he had entered into an agreement for purchase of the suit property measuring for the total extent of 1 acre 84 cents for a total consideration of Rs. 14,85,225.00 (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Eighty Five Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Five only) on 27.02.2006. Under the said agreement he had paid an advance of Rs. 5,68,000.00 (Rupees Five Lakhs Sixty Eight Thousand Only). As per the said agreement, the balance amount has to be paid within a period of three months and the defendants will have to pay the taxes payable for the suit property. The plaintiff sent a legal notice demanding execution of sale deed on 12.02.2007. The said legal notice was returned as "not claimed". Since the defendants failed to comply with the demand, the plaintiff came forward with the above suit for Specific Performance.

(2.) The defendants resisted the suit contending that the suit agreement is true, but time is the essence of the contract and since the plaintiff has not come forward to pay the balance of the sale consideration within the period stipulated in the agreement, the defendants are not bound to comply with the demand for Specific Performance. It was also contended that the defendants had entered into an agreement for purchase of 10 acres of agricultural lands from one Munusamy believing that the plaintiff would come forward to pay the balance of sale consideration within a period of three months from the date of agreement. According to the defendants the failure on the part of the plaintiff to pay the balance of sale consideration within a period of three months, has disabled them from purchasing the property from the said Munusamy and they suffered loss, since the said Munusamy had refused to return the advance of Rs. 2,50,000.00 (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only). On consideration of the above pleadings, the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruvallur framed the following issues:

(3.) On the side of the plaintiff, PW-1 and PW-2 were examined and Ex. A-1 to A-4 were marked. On the side of the defendants, DW-1 to DW-4 were examined and no documentary evidence was produced.