GUDISA SATYANARAYANA Vs. MITHIREDDY MUSALINAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in AS No. 34 of 1997 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram, preferred against the judgment and decree in OS No. 31 of 1983 on the file of the District Munsif, Cheepurupally.

(2.) The appellants are the defendants 1 to 4 and the respondents are the plaintiffs and the 5th defendant in the suit. The plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale against the defendants 1 to 4 to execute a Registered Sale Deed in favour of the plaintiff after receipt of the balance of sale consideration. According to the plaintiff, the first defendant agreed to sell the suit schedule lands of an extent of Ac.1-50 cents to the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 1,800.00 and executed an agreement of sale dated 28-3-1983 by taking an advance of Rs. 800.00 towards part of sale consideration. Defendants 2 to 4 are the minor sons of the first defendant. The first defendant executed the agreement of sale on behalf the minor sons. As per the terms of the agreement, the plaintiff after securing the money, requested the defendant to execute the sale deed, after receipt of the balance of the sale consideration, but the defendant failed to do so. Therefore, the suit for the above relief.

(3.) The first defendant filed a written statement contending that the agreement of sale is not enforceable under law. The plaintiff cheated the defendant and obtained his signature on the sale agreement. The defendant never agreed for the terms of the agreement. He has only 0.84 cents of land in the suit schedule. The plaintiff did not come forward with the money inspite of several demands made by the defendant and was postponing the same on the pretext that he has no money. The plaintiff is not ready to perform his part of contract under the agreement. Hence the suit is liable to be dismissed with costs.