VENKATACHALAM @ V P V SALEM (DECEASED) Vs. KALIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants 3 and 4, subsequent purchasers, who had suffered a decree of Specific Performance in O.S.No.276 of 1986, are the appellants. The said suit was filed by the 1st respondent claiming that she is the assignee of the agreement entered into between the defendants 1 and 2 and one Dastageer on 23.06.1985. As per the agreement dated 23.06.1985 the defendants 1 and 2 had agreed to convey the suit property in favour of the said Dastageer for a total consideration of Rs.64,500/- and received an advance of Rs.10,000/-, time for performance was fixed as 6 months. The said Dastageer assigns the right under the agreement to the plaintiff by a deed dated 03.09.1985. While so, the defendants 1 and 2 had sold the property subject matter of the agreement dated 23.06.1985 in favour of the defendants 3 and 4 on 21.04.1986. The present suit came to be filed claiming specific performance on 16.06.1986.

(2.) It was also contended by the plaintiff that the defendants 3 and 4 namely subsequent purchasers were aware of the agreement dated 23.06.1985 as well as assignment dated 03.09.1985.

(3.) The defendants 1 and 2 resisted the suit contending that they never entered into an agreement with the said Dastageer. According to them, they had authorized one C.K.Zafarullah, who is the sisters son of 2nd defendant to collect rents. The said C.K.Zafarullah claiming that he need certain signatures to enable him to collect rents, obtained the thumb impression of the 1st defendant and signature of the 2nd defendant and mt has been used by the said C.K.Zafarullah and one Mohammed Ali, who was originally appointed as power agent of defendants 1 and 2, to create the suit agreement.