B. K. SOMASEKHARA, J.

( 1 ) IN a suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale in favour of first respondent depended upon in O. S. No. 85 of 1982 which was decreed by the learned Sub-Judge, Khammam on 25-4-1987 which was confirmed by the additional District Judge, Khammam in A. S. No. 24 of 1987 dated 30-12-1988 has resulted in this second appeal raising the following substantial questions of law.

( 2 ) NON-COMPLIANCE of mandatory requirement in a suit for specific performance; to plead readiness and willingness to perform the part of the contract by the plaintiff is fatal to the suit and in this case when that was not done in addition to want of proof, the learned Judges of the Courts below were totally beyond the legal fore to spell their findings and the decisions.

( 3 ) WHEN the claim petition filed by the plaintiff under Order 21 Rule 58 of c. P. C. in regard to the property covered by the agreement which was under attachment in the Execution proceedings filed by defendant No. 2 came to be dismissed and when the petition to set aside the order of dismissal of the petition was not allowed, the suit for specific performance filed by him was barred by virtue of Order 21 R

Click Here to Read the rest of this document