A party must be properly served to uphold their right to contest a case; lack of effective service justifies remanding a case for a fresh hearing.

JUDGMENT :

RAJESH RAI K, J.

The defendant in O.S. No.109/2019 is before this Court in this appeal.

2. The learned Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., at Channapatna, (hereinafter referred to as "the Trial Court") has decreed the suit in O.S.No.109/2019 with costs vide judgment dated 30.01.2023 in the following terms:

(i) The defendant is hereby directed to execute a regular registered Sale Deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule property by receiving balance sale consideration of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs) from him within two months from the date of said judgment.

(ii) The plaintiff is at liberty to get the registered Sale Deed executed through Court Commissioner and for the delivery of possession of the suit schedule property in appropriate execution petition, in the even of defendant failing to comply with the above order of this Court.

(iii) It is hereby further ordered that the defendant shall deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule property to the plaintiff soon after execution of the registered Sale Deed in terms of the above order."

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

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

The suit in O.S. No.109/2019 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 vacant site bearing Municipal Door No.2262/A/B-1 measuring to an extent of East to West 20-1/2 feet and North to South 54 feet and another site in the same number measuring East to West 18 feet and North to South 12 feet and both properties, in total measuring 1323 sq.ft., situated adjacent to each other at Ward No.10, Municipal 'A' Division, B.M.Road, Channapattana Town, Ramanagara District (hereinafter referred to as "the suit schedule property", for short) and if the defendant failed to execute a regular Sale Deed in pursuance of the decree to be passed, then the same may be executed by the Court through its machinery and for costs.

5. The plaintiff has averred in the plaint that, the defendant has entered into an Agreement of Sale dated 05.11.2018 agreeing to sell the suit schedule property. The plaintiff has further submitted that the defendant for his legal necessity has approached him with an intention to sell the suit schedule property and that he had agreed to purchase the same. That on 05.11.2018 sale negotiations held between himself and defendant and the sale price was fixed at Rs.35,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lakhs Only). Thereafter, the defendant received an advance amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) before the attesting witnesses, and executed an Agreement of Sale and also agreed to execute a regular Sale Deed by receiving balance sale consideration amount of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs) within 1 month. The defendant for one or the other reason was postponing the same. However, the plaintiff had the definite information from the reliable sources that the defendant is trying to alienate the suit schedule property to some other person and thereby to create a third party interest over it. Therefore, the plaintiff had got issued a legal notice on 11.06.2019 through RPAD calling upon the defendant to receive the balance amount and also for execution of regular Sale Deed. But the same was returned on 13.06.2019 as unserved with shara "addressee left". It was stated that the defendant had intentionally and deliberately violated the terms and conditions of the said agreement.

6. It was further stated that the plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part of contract in terms of Agreement of Sale and to