The court's discretion to grant specific performance under Section 22 of the Specific Relief Act and the entitlement to compensation for breach of contract.

YASUDEYAMURTHY, J.

( 1 ) THE pltf. is the applt. before us. "she filed a suit in O. S. No. 12/46-47 on the file of the Diat. J , Shimoga, against the Shimoga Co-operative Bank Ltd. , as deft. 1 and one A. K. Nannesab as deft, 2 Her case was that the plaint schedule house which 13 situated in Shimoga Town belonged to her, that deft. 2 claiming that they had purchased the same in Ct. auction had sought to take possession from her when as she did not want to involve herself in further litigation, she entered into an agreement with deft, I on or about 7-4 1941 to purchase the property for its. 1,400; of this a sum of Rs. 200 was to be paid as part of the purchase money and the balance in monthly instalments of Rs. 15, the entire amount being payable by the end of December 1947; that accordingly she bad paid a sum of Rs. 200 and had also paid some instalments and that nevertheless deft. I had purported to sell the property to deft. 2 for a sum of Rs. 3,800 on 17-7-1945. She, therefore, sought for specific performance of the agreement, or in the alternative for possession of the house or damages. Deft. 1 admitted the agreement but contended that the pltf. had been extremely irregular in the matter of payment of the instalments in spite of numerous chances given to her, that the contract had, therefore, come to an end and that they were justified in conveying the property to deft. 2.

( 2 ) THE learned Dist. J. who tried the case, dismissed the plif's suit. He held that the agreement and the conduct on the part of defb. 1 Bank showed that time was not meant to be of the essence of the contract, that the pltf. was responsible for the breach of the contract and not deft 1, that deft. 2 was not a bona fide purchaser for value of the suit property without notice and that the pltf was not the owner of the property and was not entitled to any relief except to receive back from deft. 1 Rs. 441 which she had paid to deft ). 1 in pursuance of the agreement. Hence this appeal.

( 3 ) THE point whether deft. 2 was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice does not really arise in this case as in the sale deed executed in his favour by deft. 1 the prior agreement in favour of the pltf. is mentioned and deft. 2 has undertaken to take possession of the property himself. The claim that the pltf. is the owner of the property is not also seriously pressed before us, nor is there any evidence therefor.

( 4 ) IN this case many of the facts are admitted or are conclusively established by the documentary evidence Deft. 1 purchased the property in Ct. auction and took delivery of the same through Ct. under Ex II dated 15-5-40. On the same day the pltf. executed in favour of deft 1 a lease deed under which she acknowledged the title of the Bank and agreed to pay monthly rents of Rs. 8 for the property. Later she made an appln. on 22. 5 40 to deft. 1 Bank saying that she and her children had no other residence and that the Bank should allow her to retain the house fur herself for the amount for which they had purchased the same in the auction. She offered to pay immediately rs. 200 towards the purchase money and the balance in instalments of Rs. 35 p. m. After some correspondence this request of hers was accepted by the Bank and on 28-1-41 the honorary secretary of the Bank wrote the letter Ex. XV informing her that the Bank had agreed to her proposal subject to the condition that if any one instalment was not paid the house could be otherwise disposed of by the Bank. The pltf. paid Rs. 200 on 7 4-41 and went on paying several instalments as is evidenced by Exs. E. to E-21. As the pltf. failed to pay further instalments tbe bank issued through their lawyer a notice. Ex. XXIX dated 4-5-1944 in which she was called upon to pay the rents that had accrued and to vacate the house and informing her that if she failed to do 30 a suit would be filed. The pitf. sent the reply as per Ex. XXX, in which she pointed out that she had not taken the house for rent,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document