The plaintiff must demonstrate readiness and willingness to perform a contract for specific performance, which was not established in this case.

JUDGMENT :

Venuthurumalli Gopala Krishna Rao, J.

This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (“C.P.C.” for short) is filed aggrieved against the Judgment and decree, dated 02.09.2010 in A.S.No.74 of 2006, on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Tenali, confirming the Judgment and decree, dated 30.12.2005 in O.S.No.59 of 1996, on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali.

2. The 1^st appellant herein is the plaintiff and the respondents herein are defendants in O.S.No.59 of 1996, on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali.

During the pendency of the appeal, the 1^st appellant died and his legal representative is brought on record as 2^nd appellant.

3. The plaintiff initiated action in O.S.No.59 of 1996, on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, with a prayer for specific performance of contract of sale, dated 07.03.1994 and direct the defendants to execute a regular sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property and register the same and also for costs.

4. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, dismissed the suit without costs. Felt aggrieved of the same, the unsuccessful plaintiff in the above said suit filed A.S.No.74 of 2006, on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Tenali. The learned XI Additional District Judge, Tenali, dismissed the appeal confirming the decree and judgment of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali. Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiff approached this Court by way of second appeal.

5. For the sake of convenience, both parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the original suit.

6. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, as set out in the plaint averments in O.S.No.59 of 1996, is as follows:

Defendants 2 to 5 are children of 1^st defendant. 1^st defendant borrowed Rs.25,000/- from Annabattuni Rajyam, who is the mother of plaintiff, on 16.05.1990. Both defendant Nos.1 and 2 executed a promissory note. As the amount was not paid, a legal notice was issued to the defendant Nos.1 and 2 on 22.02.1993. The defendant Nos.1 and 2 received the notice and made part payments, leaving balance of Rs.10,000/- by 12.05.1993. A cheque was issued for the said amount on Indian Bank, Tenali in favour of Annabattuni Babu Rao. Subsequently, 2^nd defendant represented that he would deposit the cheque amount after obtaining loan from Andhra Bank, Tenali. Waiting for sufficient time Babu Rao presented the cheque on 08.11.1993 and the said cheque was bounced for want of sufficient funds. Babu Rao got issued a registered notice on 22.11.1993 which was returned as continuously absent at the address and not in the village. Again notice was issued but it was also returned with the same endorsement by 07.03.1994. Defendant Nos.1 and 2 were indebted to the plaintiff’s father and mother and his senior paternal uncle under promotes, dated 23.06.1993 and 23.07.1993 in favour of plaintiff’s senior paternal uncle. There was pressure for clearance of debts, 1^st defendant agreed to execute a sale contract in favour of plaintiff and accordingly, on 07.03.1994 all the defendants executed a stamped sale agreement in favour of the plaintiff for schedule property. Out of the sale consideration of Rs.60,000/- went in discharge of the debts due under the above mentioned pronotes and the balance of the sale consideration of Rs.19,750/- was agreed to be paid with interest at 24% per annum on the date of registration of regular sale deed. Vendors delivered possession of the schedule land covered Ac.1-45 cents in D.No.106/2 of Amarthaluru Village on the date of contract of sale. It was agreed under the contract that if there is a delay in execution of