S. NARSIMHA Vs. GEETLA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 7/8/2003 passed by the learned II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy (for short "trial court ") in O.S.No.161 of 2000, whereby and whereunder the trial court while dismissing the suit filed for specific performance of the agreement of sale was dismissed, ordered for refund of Rs.4,00,000.00 paid by the appellant-plaintiff with interest thereon, the present appeal is preferred by the plaintiff.

(2.) The contention of the learned Counsel appellant is that the trial Court erred in holding that the appellant failed to perform his part of contract and the time of essence of contract. He also stated that the letters written by the respondents on 21/7/2000 extending period of payment till 15/3/2000 were not filed before the court. In fact he never received those letters but they were brought into existence to suit stand of the respondents. The trial court believed the story of the respondents and held that the appellant is not ready and willing to perform his part of contract. In fact the payment of balance amount was subject to measurement of the land by the respondents. He need not show physically about cash balance as on that date. He also stated that in a suit for specific performance granting relief of specific performance is a rule and refusal is an exception, but the trial court without appreciating the facts and without assigning any reasons properly dismissed the suit and thus requested to allow the appeal by setting the impugned judgment.

(3.) Heard the arguments on both sides and also perused the record and also the citations filed by both the Counsel.