S SANTHA RAJAGOPAL Vs. T SADASIVAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff before the Court below is the appellant in this appeal suit. The plaintiff has filed O.S. No. 51 of 1983 for specific performance and prayed to direct the defendants to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff free from all encumbrances after receiving the balance sale consideration of Rs. 89,000.00 and on their failure to do so, to execute the sale deed through Court. On dismissal of the suit, the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) The averments contained in the plaint are that on 10.4.1980, Thamanna Chettiar, the first defendant in the suit, entered into an agreement of sale with the plaintiff agreeing to sell the properly for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000.00. The time for execution of the sale deed was fixed at three months. The Plaintiff paid an advance of Rs. 20,000.00 on the date of signing of the agreement of sale. Subsequent to the execution of agreement of sale, since the sons of the first defendant have filed a suit in O.S. No. 905 of 1980 restraining the first defendant from executing any sale deed in favour of the plaintiff or from alienating the suit property to third parties and also obtained an order of injunction obtained against the first defendant, the first defendant has made an endorsement in the reverse of the sale agreement thereby agreed to extend the period for completing the sale from 10.7.1980 for a further period of two years. It was further averred that since the period was extended by another two years, a sum of Rs. 10,000.00 out of the advance amount of Rs. 20,000.00 was returned by the first defendant to the plaintiff and an endorsement to that effect was also made in the agreement of sale in which both the parties have signed. On 30.10.1982, the first defendant sought for another six months time till 10.1.1983 for completing the sale and received a sum of Rs. 1,000.00 towards further sale advance for which also an endorsement was made. According to the plaintiff, the property agreed to be sold by the first defendant is the portion of the property allotted to him in a family partition and therefore, the first defendant, being the absolute owner, is having every right to sell the property to the plaintiff.

(3.) According to the plaintiff, inspite of repeated demands made by her, the first defendant has not even disclosed the result of the suit filed by his sons against him and failed to execute the sale deed in her favour. Thereafter, the plaintiff came to know that the first defendant colluded with his sons and filed the suit in O.S. No. 905 of 1980 with a view to delay the exercution of the sale deed. The plaintiff has also stated that she was always ready and willing to perform her part of the contract. Infact, the plaintiff was ready to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs. 89,000.00 and get the sale deed executed in her name.