The court emphasizes the necessity for plaintiffs to substantiate their claims with appropriate documentation, allowing for retrial when procedural missteps can otherwise deny justice.

JUDGMENT :

RAJESH RAI K., J.

1. The plaintiff in O.S.No.102/2023 on the file of the II Addl.Senior Civil Judge and C.J.M. at Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada (hereinafter referred to as "the Trial Court") has filed this regular first appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 20.06.2024 by which the suit in O.S.No.102/2023 was dismissed without cost.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their ranks before the Trial Court.

3. The abridged facts of the case are as under:

The suit in O.S. No.102/2023 was filed by the plaintiff for relief of specific performance of contract against the defendant directing him to execute an absolute Sale Deed in his favour in respect of non-agricultural property bearing Sy.No.179/2A, measuring 0-8.53 (345.38 Sq. Mtrs) of Badagaulipady village, Mangalore Taluk, D.K District (hereinafter referred to as "the Schedule 'A' Property" for short) and another property which is an under construction shop premises Number-01, measuring 320 Sq.Ft on the ground floor of the building known as "IS Complex" in the Schedule 'A' Property (hereinafter referred to as "the Schedule 'B' Property" for short) and such other relief.

4. The plaintiff has averred in the plaint that, the defendant is the owner of the suit schedule properties, having purchased the same by virtue of registered Sale Deed dated 05.08.1988. The defendant has undertaken to construct the commercial-cum-residential building with a view to dispose of the same to intending buyers, for the urgent financial necessities and decided to sell the suit schedule properties to the plaintiff. After mutual discussions, the plaintiff and the defendant have entered into an Agreement for Sale in respect of the same on 10.04.2018, whereupon the defendant had agreed to sell the suit schedule properties for a mutually agreed sale consideration of Rs.18,00,000/-. As per the terms of the aforesaid Agreement for Sale, the plaintiff had paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- by cheque dated 10.04.2018 bearing No.740000 drawn on Canara Bank, Valencia Branch, Mangaluru to the defendant towards advance sale consideration. The balance sale consideration of Rs.8,00,000/- was agreed to be paid as per the terms and conditions of the said agreement at the time of registration of Sale Deed.

5. It is further averred by the plaintiff that whenever the defendant has requested for payments to set right the documents, the plaintiff has made the same and that the defendant received a sum totally amounting to Rs.6,00,000/- towards part sale consideration on various occasions. Thereafter, whenever the plaintiff requested the defendant for execution of the Sale Deed within the stipulated time i.e., 10.04.2019, the defendant used to inform the plaintiff that Form No.9 and 11(A), Completion Certificate, Valuation of Property, and Loan Clearance Certificate were required to be obtained. Hence, the defendant has requested the plaintiff to extend the period for execution of the Sale Deed as he could not complete his part of the contract and accordingly, through Supplemental Agreement dated 05.11.2021, the period was extended till 05.02.2022.

6. Therefore, the plaintiff was liable to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.2,50,000/- to the defendant at the time of execution and registration of the Sale Deed. Except to make the payment of the aforesaid balance sale consideration of Rs.2,50,000/- there was no other contractual obligations to be performed on the part of the plaintiff before the registration of Sale Deed.

7. It is further submitted that he has been always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and ready to get executed the registered Sale D