( 1 ) THIS appeal is preferred by the sixth defendant in O. S. No. 1436 of 1981 on the file of the Court of I Additional judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. By judgment and decree impugned in the appeal, the Trial Court directed Respondents 2 to 4 herein and appellant herein to execute and register sale deed in respect of plaint schedule property in favour of the first respondent herein. The appellant is a subsequent purchaser of the property under registered sale deed from Ramesh chand Khanna, the predecessor of respondents 2 to 4. In this appeal for the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale, dated 4. 12. 1978 in respect of property bearing Municipal No. 4-1-1 admeasuring 220 square yards situated at King Koti, hyderabad. Her allegations in the plaint in brief are as follows. The first defendant ramesh Chand Khanna represented in december 1978 that he purchased the suit schedule plot with a room under registered sale deed from Private Estate of His Exalted highness the Nizam VII and wanted to dispose of the same. Accordingly he executed suit agreement of sale in favour of the plaintiff agreeing to sell the property at rs. 325 per square yard. The plaintiff paid advance amount of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) through a cheque drawn on Allahabad Bank, Hyderabad branch and the first defendant acknowledged the amount under a separate receipt. The vendor promised to get the sale deed executed and registered in favour of the plaintiff but he dodged the issue on one pretext or the other. The plaintiff has been offering the balance sale consideration of Rs. 41,500/- (Rupees forty one thousand five hundred only) for execution of the sale deed and he has been ready and willing to perform her part of the contract. The plaintiff later learnt that permission from urban Land Ceiling authorities is not required, that the first defendant was desperately in need of money and therefore he executed sale agreement, but after taking money refused to sell the property. Having come to know this, the plaintiff got issued a telegraphic legal notice through her lawyer. The plaintiff is ready to deposit balance consideration and further amount towards stamps and registration charges to fulfil her part of the obligation and formalities under the sale agreement. Hence, she prayed for specific performance of agreement of sale and for a direction to the first defendant to execute the sale deed.

( 3 ) THE suit was filed against the vendor Ramesh Chand Khanna. He filed a written statement admitting the execution of agreement of sale and receipt of an amount of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) towards sale money. He, however, opposed the suit alleging that the plaintiff purchased the property knowing fully well that there was litigation in relation to the property agreed to be purchased and therefore she developed cold feet and was not agreeable to purchase the plot subject to litigation and that the plaintiff was not always ready and willing to perform her part of the contract. The plaintiff s representative was informed that he should either complete the transaction or terminate the agreement and receive the advance amount paid, for which the plaintiffs representative agreed to terminate the contract by mutual consent and receive back the amount advanced by the plaintiff. Subsequently, the vendor sold the land to third party and informed the plaintiff s representative to take back the amount of rs. 30,000/ -. However, on coming to know of the increase in price, the plaintiff developed second thoughts with a mala fide intention and therefore refused to accept repayment of Rs. 30,000/ -. The telegraphic notice was not followed by confirmatory notice and during the period from the date of agreement, the plaintiff never demanded for the completion of the contract and she was not ready to pay