(1.) An agreement for sale is the cause of controversy. Seeking specific performance of the agreement for sale, the purchaser filed O.S.No.99 of 2007 before the learned VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court) at Vijayawada. After due contest, judgment and decree were passed in favour of the plaintiff. What is to be noticed is that in the said suit the plaintiff/purchaser primarily sought the relief of specific performance of the agreement for sale and made an alternative prayer for refund of advance sale consideration along with interest. The learned trial Court by its judgment dated 02. 09.2010 granted the alternative relief. Feeling prick for not getting the primarily relief the plaintiff in the suit preferred this appeal under Sec. 96 C.P.C. Respondent Nos.1 to 4 in this appeal are the defendants in the suit. In this appeal the appellant prays this Court to grant him the relief of specific performance of agreement for sale.
(2.) Sri V.V.N.Narayana Rao, the learned counsel for appellant/plaintiff and Sri P.Narasimha Rao, the learned counsel for respondents argued their respective contentions.
(3.) Prefatory facts: