RAMAYEE Vs. KASTHURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 2nd defendant, who suffered a decree in O.S. No. 159 of 1999 on the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Puducherry, for specific performance of contract is the appellant. The 1st respondent is the plaintiff and the 2nd respondent is the 1st defendant in the suit. The said suit was filed for a decree against the defendants 1 and 2 for specific performance of contract of agreement of sale dtd. 30/1/1996 in respect of suit property after receiving the balance sale consideration of Rs.3,00,000.00; directing the defendants to put the plaintiff into possession of the suit property by delivery of possession and for a consequential injunction restraining the 2nd defendant, her agents, servants, henchmen from causing waste and damage to suit property and from alienating the same until the disposal of the suit; or in the alternative to grant a decree against the defendants directing them to return the advance amount Rs.12,00,000.00 with interest amounting to Rs.14,66,800.00 with subsequent interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of plaint till date of realization. The learned Principal Subordinate Judge, by judgment and decree dtd. 10/4/2013 decreed the suit with costs. Aggrieved over the same, the 2nd defendant filed an appeal suit in A.S. No. 9 of 2015 and the learned Principal District Judge, by judgment and decree dtd. 29/3/2017, has dismissed the appeal suit. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the 2nd defendant is before this court with the present second appeal.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties in this proceedings will hereinafter be referred to as per their array before the trial court.

(3.) The case of the plaintiff is that the 2nd defendant is the owner of the suit property and he had executed a registered Power of Attorney Deed in favour of the 1st defendant on 22/1/1995 whereby he had given power to the 1st defendant to alienate his property which is more fully described in the plaint. Thereafter, the 1st defendant had entered into an agreement of sale on 30/1/1996 and the sale consideration was fixed at Rs.15,00,000.00. Initially, the plaintiff had paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000.00 towards advance sale consideration and the balance sale consideration of Rs.5,00,000.00 was agreed to be paid at the time of registration of the sale deed. Thereafter on 5/4/1996, a sum of Rs.2,00,000.00 was paid to the 1st defendant which was duly acknowledged by him and, therefore, only a sum of Rs.3,00,000.00 is due to be paid towards balance of sale consideration. The plaintiff was ready with the balance sale consideration on 22/3/1997 and requested the 1st defendant to execute the sale deed and the 1st defendant, in turn, had informed him that the 2nd defendant had already revoked the power of attorney deed on 7/6/1996 and thereafter, expressed his inability to execute the sale deed. Then, the plaintiff had approached the 2nd defendant requesting her to execute the sale deed. On 20/3/1997, the plaintiff again called upon the 2nd defendant to execute the sale deed. But, the 2nd defendant had only sought for time to execute the sale deed. Further, according to the plaintiff, since the 2nd defendant failed to come forward to execute the sale deed on 22/3/1997, by way of notice, he called upon the 2nd defendant to come over to the registrar office at Puducherry on 28/4/1997 for execution and registration of sale deed after receiving the balance sale consideration. But, the notice sent by him got returned as the 2nd defendant had refused to received the same. The 1st defendant issued a reply expressing his inability to execute the sale deed as the power of attorney deed had already been revoked by the 2nd defendant. Since the defendants failed to executed the sale deed, the plaintiff has filed the suit for specific performance of contract and for other reliefs.