( 1 ) THE unsuccessful plaintiff pre. ferred this appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned subordinate Judge, vijayawada in O. S. 353/77 dt. 16-2-1981 dismissing the suit of the plaintiff for specific performance based on an oral agreement of sale dt. 1-11-77 in respect of h No 11-49-311 in Sivalayam Street, vijayawada. Respondents 1 and 2 in this appeal are defendants 1 and 2 in the suit. The parties in this appeal are referred to in their original character as in the court below. The plaintiff is a firm represented by its partner Mohanlal Joshi. The first defendant is the owner; she is a resident of eluru town and the plaintiff is the lessee of the ground floor portion on a monthly rental of Rs. 140/ -. The case pleaded by the plaintiff in brief is as follow; The first defendant being a house wife without "much education", either her husband somaraju or her son Satyanarayana (D. W. 2) used to collect rents from the tenants whenever came to Vijayawada and pass receipts. "they were always acting on her behalf as her duly authorised representatives in the management of her property". On 1-11-71, Satyanarayana, the son of the first defendant accompanied by Kodeti Krishna Murthy, Carpenter maistry (P. W. 3) came to Vijayawada, met mohanlal Joshi, the partner of the plaintiff firm and negotiated on behalf of the first defendant the terms for sale of the plaint schedule house The deal was struck for rs. 95, 000/- and an oral agreements was concluded as per which the plaintiff-firm should pay an advance of Rs. 4, 000/- and the balance consideration of Rs. 91,000/- at the time of execution and registration of the sale deed within one month. Satyanarayana, d. W. 2 received the advance and agreed to send a written agreement under the signature of his mother, the first dcfeu- daat. After going to Blum, Satyanarayana and Carpenter-Maistry Krishna Murthy appraised the first defendant about the terms and conditions of the agreement and obtained her approval and the same was communicated to the plaintiff by a letter ex. A-1, dt 3-11-1977 in the hand writing of the first defendant s husband Somaraju. A new request was made in the letter Ex. A-1 for an additional advance of rs. 40,000/- and the balance amount of rs. 51, 000/- to be payable before the sub registrar at the time of the registration. Somaraju, the husband of the first defendant expressed his desire in the letter Ex. A-1 to come to Vijayawada to receive the additional advance of Rs. 40, 000/- and "deliver the written agreement of sale to the plaintiff. " In case it was not possible for him to go to Vijayawada, Somaraju desired that the plaintiff might send its representative to Eluru to receive the written agreement and pay the additional advance of Rs. 40, 000/ -. Another letter ex. A-3 dt. 10-11-77 was written by somaraju admitting the agreement and informing the plaintiff that he and his wife were not in a position to go to Vijayawada in view of their failing health and so it was desirable that the plaintiff sent a representative to collect written agreement and pay the additional advance of Rs. 40, 000/ -. Pursuant to this request Mohanlal Joshi (P. W. 1), partner of the plaintiff-firm went to the house of defendant in Eluru on 15-11-77 with the advance money of rs. 40, 000/- At that time the first defendant s husband was not in the house and therefore, the first defendant could not receive the money and deliver the written agreement as promised. But she informed mohanlal that she would arrange to send the agreement through her husband and requested Mohanlal Joshi to keep the money ready and expressed her anxiety to complete the transaction within one month. Mohanlal Joshi, therefore, had to go back to Vijayawada with the money without paying advance and obtaining the written agreement. It was alleged in the plaint that Jethtnal Bhabutmal, the husband of the second defendant having come to know of the agreement of sale in favour of the plaintiff, con