PANEM VENKANARAYANA SASTRY Vs. RAJUPALLI CHINNA YELLA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants in the three suits O. S. Nos, 521 to 323 of 1951, on the file of the District Munsifs Court, Cuddapah, are the appellants before me. These suits were Instituted separately by the respondents in these second appeals for the specific performance of a contract of sale by directing the execution of proper conveyances by the defendants, of the suit properties. The 1st defendant in all the suits is the owner of the properties. Defendants 2 and 3 are the purchasers subsequent to the alleged agreement. The 3rd defendant died pending the suit and his legal representative was brought on record.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff is that there was a binding and concluded contract entered into between the plaintiffs in the three suits and the 1st defendant whereunder the 1st defendant agreed to sell the suit properties to the three plaintiffs and that contrary to that agreement he sold the suit proper ties to defendants 2 and 3 who purchased them with the knowledge of the plaintiffs rights under the con-tract. It was also alleged that the sale deed in favour of defendants 2 and 3 was collusive and ante-dated document, and that defendants 2 and 3 were not bona fide purchasers for value.

(3.) The case of the 1st defendant Is that there were only negotiations in respect of the purchase of the suit properties by the plaintiffs and that those negotiations had never become crystallized into a concluded and binding agreement, and that, therefore, he was free to sell and convey the properties to defendants 2 and 3. The case of the defendants 2 and 3 is that they were bona fide purchasers for value without notice of the alleged rights of the plaintiffs and that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the reliefs prayed for by them.