A.KANAGARAJ CHAIRMAN Vs. M.CHAKKARAVARTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant in the suit filed for specific performance.

(2.) Under Ex.A1, dated 03.04.2006, an agreement was entered into between the appellant and the respondent. The sale consideration fixed was Rs.18,40,000/- with the time limit of six months. Under Ex.A2, an endorsement of sale agreement was made on Ex.A1 enhancing the sale consideration from Rs.18,40,000/- to Rs.28,00,000/-. An endorsement was also made to the effect that the time limit of six months granted has been extended by one more month. The total sum of Rs.8,00,000/- was paid. Of this aforesaid amount, Rs.1,00,000/- was paid on 16.10.2006.

(3.) Thereafter, the respondent sent a notice marked as Ex.B10 dated 29.03.2007. In the aforesaid notice, the respondent has clearly stated that inasmuch as time is the essence of the contract and the same having been breached, the agreement stood cancelled. The xerox copy of the agreement as well as the demand draft for sum of Rs.8,00,000/- were also enclosed. The reply was given by the appellant/plaintiff on 17.04.2007, inter alia, stating that he is ready and willing to execute the agreement. It is further stated that the time is not the essence of the contract and there is sufficient time to execute the agreement. He further stated there was exchange of notices between the parties. In one of the notices, the appellant has stated that the sale deed was executed at the time and place stipulated by the respondent. He has also stated that he has got three years from the date of execution of Ex.A1 to execute the sale deed.