1. The defendant’s legal heirs are in second appeal against the Judgment and decree in RA No.119/2004 dated 05.09.2008 on the file of Judge, Fast Track Court, Kolar, setting aside the finding of trial Court on issue No.6 to 10 and decreeing the suit for specific performance and restraining defendants from interfering with their possession.

2. Heard the learned Senior counsel Mr.Padmanabh Mahalay for appellants and the learned counsel Mr. Rahavendra Rao, for respondents and examined the records in supplementation thereof.

3. Before I advert to the contentious issues raised by the learned counsel on both sides a brief reference to the contextual facts is necessary. It reveals:

The respondents filed a suit against the appellant for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 18.01.1988 in respect of the property described in the schedule to the plaint and in that sought a direction to the defendants to receive balance sale consideration of Rs.15,000/-. Claiming to be in possession of the property they sought an order to restrain defendants from interfering with their possession.

4. The defendants while admitting he was owner of the property in question, resisted the