( 1 ) THIS is a defendant s appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 4-3-1992 passed in O: S. No. 261 / 1988 on the file of Addl. Subordinate Judge, rangareddy District, at Saroornagar. The Court below decreed the suit filed by the respondent / plaintiff for specific performance of the contract.

( 2 ) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties herein are refe rred to as they are arrayed in the lower Court.

( 3 ) THE learned Counsel for the appellant-defendant strenuously contended that the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Court below are not nly contrary to law but also contrary to the evidence on record. On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-plaintiff supported the decree and judgment of the lower Court.

( 4 ) IN order to appreciate the rival contentions in the appeal, it would be necessary to state the facts of the case.

( 5 ) THE respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of the contract alleging that the appellant-defendant has executed an agreement of sale on 9-11-1986 agreeing to sell a plot bearing No. 222 in Survey No. 218 / 1 situated at Defence Housing Co-operative Society, Ramakrishnapuram, malkajigiri, Hyderabad, for a consideration of Rs. 52,000/- on the terms and conditions set out in the said agreement, He alleged in the plaint that as per the agreement, the defendant received a sum of Rs. 10,000/- out of total sale consideration of Rs. 52,000/- and the balance was payable at the time of the registration. It is the further case of the plaintiff that according to the agreement, the defendant had to obtain necessary permission and certificate under Section 26 of Urban Land Ceiling Act for the sale of the plot in question in favour of the plaintiff. He further averred that he met the defendant several times for obtaining the Urban Land Ceiling Clearance Certificate (hereinafter called the u. L. C. Clearance Certificate ). The defendant also promised him that he would get the U. L. C. Certificate and no encumbrance certificate, since the plaintiff wants to avail loan facility from his office. He stated that on this assurance of the defendant that he was ready to sell the plot in question, the plaintiff applied for the loan from his office. The plaintiff further averred in the plaint that in fact, he pursued the a pplications filed by the defendant for permission under the Urban Land Ceiling Act and the concerned authorities issued permission under L. D is. So. 0 and C. A. U. L. C. No. 81 / 2612 / 2686, dt. 24-7-1987. By mistake the permission was granted for an area of 315 sq. yards, but the defendant had agreed to sell 350 sq. yards. It was in those circumstances, the defendant at the request of the plaintiff, filed another application on 7-8-1987 and the Competent Authority issued another rectified U. L. C. Clearance Certificate, vide Order No. 1 / 2612 / 2686, dt. 27-8-1987 rectifying the mistake regarding the extent of land permitted to be sold showing at 350 sq. yards instead of 315 sq. yards. The plaintiff further stated that immediately after the issue of the said Certificate, he sent a telegram to the defendant informing the receipt of these U. L. C. Clearance Certificates. He also sent a letter dated 3-9-1987 confirming the receipt of U. L. C. Clearance certificates and requested the defendant to intimate the probable date for execution of the registered sale deed. The defendant did not give reply to his letter dated 3-9-1987. In those circumstances, the plaintiff got issued a legal notice dated 10th November, 1987 through his advocate, for which the defendant did not give any reply. The plaintiff also got published a public notice in Deccan Chronicle on 10.-10-1987 stating that the property in question was the subject matter of an agreement of sale in favour of the plaintiff and no person could endeavour to buy it. After the publication of that notice in Deccan Chronicle, the defendant issued a reply through his advocate to th