G ANNAMALAI Vs. DHANABHACKIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE unsuccessful second defendant in O.S.No.93 of 1987 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tiruvannmalai, whose appeal in A.S.No.166 of 1997 has also been dismissed by the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruvannamalai, is the appellant in the above second appeal.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the suit. a. The case of the plaintiff, in-brief, is as follows:-

(3.) AFTER framing the appropriate issues, the suit was taken up for trial by the trial Court and during the trial, the plaintiff has been examined as P.W.1 and one of the attesters of the sale agreement has been examined as P.W.2 and Exs.A1 to A4 have been marked but on the side of the second defendant, the second defendant has been examined as D.W1, the attester of Ex.B1 has been examined as D.W.2 and one Selvam has been examined as D.W.3 and the first defendant has been examined as D.W.4. 5a. The trial Court on a consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced in the case held that Ex.A1 sale agreement is true and genuine and the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform her part of the contract, whereas the first defendant was evading to execute the sale deed having entered into sale agreement Ex.A1 but to defeat the right of the plaintiff, he had executed Ex.B1 sale deed in favour of the second defendant and decreed the suit as prayed for.