K. S. SHRIVASTAV, J.

( 1 ) A. S. NO. 2869 of 1986: the First and the Second Defendants are the appellants. Suit for specific performance has been decreed.

( 2 ) THIS judgment shall also govern the disposal of appeal A. S. 2867/1986 which has been filed by the third and the fourth defendants.

( 3 ) THE facts giving rise to this appeal may briefly be stated as follows :- the 1st and the 2nd defendants are the husband and wife, while the 3rd and the 4th defendants are their sons, The 1st and the 2nd defendants had executed an agreement, Ex. A-1, on 9-2-1978, to sell 1554-1-0 Sq. Yds. of land situated in 10th Ward, Tenali town (for short the suit land ) to the plaintiff for a consideration of Rs. 26,512/- and had received an earnest money of rs. 1,000/- on the same day. It was agreed between them that the plaintiff would pay the balance of consideration in cash within a period of one month therefrom and get the sale deed executed and registered in his name at his own cost. It was further agreed between them that, if the plaintiff failed to perform his part of the contract within the stipulated time, he would pay interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum on the balance amount of consideration and after paying this amount with interest, he would get the sale deed executed and registered in his name. It was also agreed between, them that the 1st and the 2nd defendants would deliver possession of the suit land only on the date of the execution and registration of the sale deed. The plaintiff instituted a suit for specific performance of the contract and for possession alleging that, as per the terms of the agreement, he had raised the level of the ground in a portion of the suit land and had kept hay-rick that the 1st and the 2nd defendants in his absence on 5-10-1978 and 6-10-1978 had meddled with the hay-stack and had thrown away the hay and bamboos in the adjoining land causing damages of Rs. 3,000/- and, therefore, he had filed a suit for damages in O. S. No. 682/1978 and that he was anxious to pay the balance amount of consideration by the end of December, 1978 itself, but these defendants had adopted unlawful attitude. He further alleged that he was always ready to perform the terms of the contract and had arranged the balance amount of consideration to be paid to the defendants, that through his advocate, he sent a telegraphic notice on 11-5-1980 to the defendants for receiving the balance amount of consideration and to get the sale deed executed and registered within one week therefrom, but while the first defendant evaded to receive the telegram, the 2nd defendant had refused to receive it, that he had published in the daily newspaper Andhra Prabha a public notice, that these defendants had committed wilful breach of the agreement and, therefore, he was not liable to pay interest on the balance amount of consideration and that he was entitled to a decree of specific performance of the contract as also for a decree for possession of the suit land.

( 4 ) THE 1st defendant denied that he had ever agreed for raising the level of the ground in a portion of the suit land for storing hay or the plaintiff had done so by spending an amount of Rs. 1,000/ -. He had further denied that the plaintiff was ever anxious to pay the balance amount of consideration by the end of December, 1978. He had also denied that he had ever adopted unlawful attitude. He had denied that he had removed the hay-stack or had thrown away the hay or the bamboos. He had also denied that the plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform the terms of the contract of he had arranged for ready cash for the payment of balance amount of consideration. He had alleged that the plaintiff was not the real purchaser and one k. Venkataratnam had obtained the agreement, Ex. A-1, in the name of the plaintiff. He had pleaded that, time was the essence of the contract. The plaintiff had no money to pay the balance amount of consideration. He did not pay the balance am

Click Here to Read the rest of this document