IMPORTANT POINT
The Plaintiff must prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform a contract for specific performance, and time can be made of the essence through express terms or circumstances.

JUDGMENT :

T. Mallikarjuna Rao, J.

This Second Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Appellant/Plaintiff against the Decree and Judgment dated 19.2.1999, in A.S. NO. 75 of 1991 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur (for short, ‘the 1st Appellate Court) confirming the decree and Judgment dated 15.02.1991, in O.S. No. 725 of 1985 on the file of I Additional District Munsif, Kovvur (for short, ‘the trial Court’).

2. The Appellant/Appellant is the Plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S. No. 725 of 1985 seeking specific performance of a contract of sale dated 06.03.1982 executed by the 1st Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff.

3. Referring to the parties as they are initially arrayed in the suit in O.S. No.725 of 1985 is expedient to mitigate any potential confusion and better comprehend the case.

4. The factual matrix, necessary and germane for adjudicating the contentious issues between the parties inter se, may be delineated as follows:

The 1st Defendant agreed to sell the plaint schedule property to Plaintiff for Rs.7,800/-. An earnest payment of Rs.400/- was received by the 1st Defendant, who then executed an agreement of sale in favour of the Plaintiff on 5.3.1984. Subsequently, Plaintiff paid Rs.1,100/-, which the 1st Defendant acknowledged on a separate stamped paper. The Plaintiff consistently demonstrated readiness and willingness to fulfill her part of the contract, including paying the remaining balance of sale consideration. However, the 1st Defendant failed to cooperate and did not execute a registered sale deed after receiving the balance of the sale consideration. Despite multiple attempts by the Plaintiff and her husband to request the execution of the sale deed including issuing a legal notice, the 1st Defendant responded with false claims. The time is not an essence contract. Plaintiff learned through this response that the 1st Defendant had sold the plaint schedule property to the 2nd Defendant under a sale deed dated 16.06.1985. This sale deed is alleged to be a sham, nominal, and collusive, created to undermine the Plaintiff’s rights. The Plaintiff, having already deposited the balance of the sale consideration in Andhra Bank, Koyyalagadam (S.B.Account No.4478), is now filing suit against both Defendants, seeking specific performance of the agreement of sale or a refund of the earnest money with interest.

5. In the written statement, the 1st Defendant admitted to entering an agreement of sale with Plaintiff on 06.08.1984 and acknowledged receiving Rs.400/- as earnest money on that day. The 1st Defendant claimed the remaining balance of sale consideration was to be paid within three months from the date of the agreement, failing which the agreement would be automatically cancelled. The Plaintiff lacked the funds to pay the balance within the stipulated period and afterwards. Consequently, since the Plaintiff failed to pay the balance of the sale consideration within three months, she became liable to pay double the advance amount. The Plaintiff was not ready and willing to fulfill her part of the contract, and that time was of the essence in the agreement. On 20.11.1984, the 1st Defendant sent a personal notice, but the Plaintiff knowingly refused to receive it. The 1st Defendant explained that she urgently needed money to perform her daughter’s marriage, which led her to enter into a second agreement with the Plaintiff’s husband. At that time, an additional sum of Rs.1100/- was paid, and the time for payment of the remaining balance was set for 01.09.1984. It was agreed that if the Plaintiff failed to pay by this date, the earnest money, totaling Rs. 1500/-, would be forfeited. The 1st Defendant emphasized that time was also made essential in this second agreement. Due to the Plaintiff’s failure to meet the conditions of both agreements, the 1st Defendant could not perform her daughter's marriage, as she lacked the necessary funds. Despite waiting a considerable amount of time, Plaintiff was still unwilling or un