1. This Second Appeal arises out of the judgment and decree, 28.07.2008, in A.S.No.16 of 2007 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, whereby he has partly reversed the judgment and decree, dated 05.07.2007, in O.S.No.95 of 1999 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Markapur.

2. The appellant filed the above-noted suit against the respondent for a direction to execute the registered reconveyance sale deed in his favour after receiving the debt amount of Rs.57,600/-; for permanent injunction restraining the respondent and his men from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property; and for payment of the suit costs.

3. The case of the appellant is that he borrowed an amount of Rs.40,000/- from the respondent on 09.06.1997 agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 12% per annum; that on the same day, the appellant executed registered sale deed in favour of the respondent as security for due payment of the debt; and that the respondent also executed an agreement in favour of the appellant to reconvey the suit schedule property to the appellant, if the latter repays the debt amount with interest within 18 months from the date of the said agreement. The appellant pleaded that he was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, but the respondent failed to receive the debt amount and execute the reconveyance deed, despite his issuing legal notice and sending mediators requesting the respondent to execute the reconveyance deed. Therefore, the appellant filed the suit.

4. The respondent filed a written statement, wherein he has admitted the fact of execution of registered sale deed by the appellant in his favour and also the agreement executed by him in favour of the appellant agreeing to reconvey the property if the debt amount is repaid within 18 months. He has, however, pleaded that though he was ready and willing to reconvey the property, the appellant was never ready to perform his part of contract; that the appellant failed to repay the debt amount within the stipulated time; and that as the time was essence of the contract and the appellant failed to repay the debt amount within the stipulated time, he has forfeited his right of reconveyance of the property.

5. On behalf of the appellant, he has examined himself as P.W-1 and also adduced the evidence of P.Ws.2 to 4. He has filed Exs.A-1 to A-6. On behalf of the respondent, he has examined himself as D.W-1 and filed Ex.B-1.

6. Based on the respective pleadings of the parties, the trial Court framed the following issues:

1. Whether the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract?

2. Whether time is essence of the contract?

3. Whether the plaintiff breached the terms of the agreement dated 09.06.1997?

4. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for a decree for specific performance of agreement for reconveyance of the property as prayed for?

7. The trial Court has answered all the issues in favour of the appellant and against the respondent. It has granted decree for reconveyance of the suit schedule property to the appellant, besides granting permanent injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with the appellant’s possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the unsuccessful defendant filed A.S.No.16 of 2007. The learned Senior Civil Judge, Markapur by his judgment, dated 28.07.2008, partly allowed the appeal by setting aside the decree for reconveyance. He has, however, confirmed the decree for permanent injunction. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of the lower appellate Court to the extent of reversing the judgment of the trial Court for reconveyance of the suit schedule property, the plaintiff filed this Second Appeal.

8. At the hearing, Sri K.Chidambaram, the learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that the lower appellate Court has committed a serious error of law in reversing the