R RAMASAMY Vs. R MUTHUSAMY (DECEASED)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant in OS No.82 of 2005 who is aggrieved by the decree for specific performance granted in the said suit is on appeal.

(2.) The property which is the subject matter of the suit originally belonged to one P.Ganesan and others. The plaintiff and the defendant who are the brothers had jointly purchased the property under a registered sale deed dated 28.08.1985. After purchasing the said property the plaintiff had executed a release deed on 14.09.1989 in favour of the defendant relinquishing his interest in the suit property for consideration. It is the claim of the plaintiff that the defendant agreed to sell the suit property to him for a total consideration of Rs.7,50,000/- on 20.10.2001 and had received an advance of Rs.6,50,000/- on the date of the agreement itself.

(3.) According to the plaintiff, a period of three years was fixed for payment of the balance sale consideration of Rs.1,00,000/-. It is also claimed that even at the time of agreement the plaintiff was in possession of the property running a work shop in the name and style of Muthu Auto Garage. The plaintiff would claim that he made several demands for execution of sale deed on or before 19.10.2004 when the period mentioned in the agreement was about expire and since the defendant did not come forward to receive the balance of sale consideration and execute a sale deed, the plaintiff was constrained to file the suit seeking specific performance.