RENUKA Vs. CHENNAKESAVALU NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant is the appellant. The respondent filed O. S. No. 12 of 1992 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri for specific performance on the basis of an alleged sale agreement said to have been executed by the defendant in favour of the respondent on 20. 05. 1988. The trial Court decreed the suit by decree and judgment dated 18. 11. 1997. Challenging the same, the appellant filed A. S. No. 3 of 1998 which came to be disposed of by the learned I Additional District Judge, Krishnagiri by decree and judgment dated 30. 11. 1999. The First Appellate Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the decree and judgment of the trial Court. Challenging the same, the appellant has come forward with this second appeal.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience, in the judgment, the defendant shall be referred to as the defendant and the respondent as plaintiff.

(3.) THE case of the respondent/plaintiff is as follows:-The suit property belongs to the defendant. On 20. 05. 1988, the defendant executed a sale agreement in favour of the plaintiff thereby agreeing to sell the suit property to him for a sale consideration of Rs. 85,000/ -. A sum of Rs. 70,000/- was paid as advance at the time of the agreement and it was agreed that the balance of sale consideration of Rs. 15,000/- should be paid on or before 25. 07. 1991 by the plaintiff and on such payment, the defendant should execute necessary sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. Thereafter, on 10. 03. 1991, the defendant received a further sum of Rs. 10,000/- from him towards the sale consideration and in acknowledgment of the same, the defendant made an endorsement on the backside of the sale agreement itself in the presence of witnesses. Again on 11. 07. 1991, the defendant received yet another amount of Rs. 4,000/- from the respondent towards sale consideration and made an endorsement on the backside of the sale agreement acknowledging the same. Thus, the balance of sale consideration to be paid was only Rs. 1,000/ -. He approached the defendant and requested her to receive the balance of sale consideration of Rs. 1,000/- which remained due and wanted her to execute the sale deed. Further, the plaintiff issued a legal notice on 03. 07. 1991 calling upon the defendant to execute sale deed. Another legal notice was also issued on 12. 09. 1991 by the plaintiff calling upon the defendant to execute necessary sale deed. But, the defendant did not choose to perform her part of contract or atleast to send a reply to the said legal notices issued by the respondent. It is further stated that the plaintiff was all along ready to perform his part of contract since the defendant was not ready to perform her part of contract, the plaintiff had to file the present suit for specific performance of contract.