F.I. REBELLO, J.:---Plaintiffs a partnership firm has filed the present suit for specific performance of the contracts for sale of immoveable and moveable properties respectively. There is also a relief by way of damages. The suit arises thus. It is the case of the plaintiffs that in February, 1976 defendant Nos. 1 to 10 represented by the defendant No. 1 and one Mr. Nicholson represented to the partner of the plaintiff Mr. Suresh Agarwal through a broker Mr. Kirti Tijoriwala of their intention to sell their immoveable and moveable properties as set out and/or described in para 1 of the plaint. The plaintiff, through their partner showed their willingness to discuss and negotiate the matter. A meeting was held between plaintiffs' partner Suresh Agarwal, the defendant No. 1 and Mr. Nicholson representing the defendant Nos. 1 to 10 at which meeting Mr. Tijoriwala was present, it was agreed that the immoveable property would be sold for the price of Rs. 6,81,000/ and moveable properties for the price of Rs. 30,000/-. The plaintiffs were to deposit with the Attorneys of defendant Nos. 1 to 10 earnest money being Rs. 68,000/ towards price of immoveable property and Rs. 3,000/- towards the sale price of the moveable property. Defendants had to hand over possession of the entire ground floor of the main building, the whole of the factory premises, stable and shed and all other open spaces. A regular Agreement for Sale would be prepared and would be executed. The agreement was not to contain express provisions as regards vacant possession and that a separate letter signed by each of the defendants was to be handed over to the plaintiffs, on the amounts of earnest money being deposited with the defendants' Attorneys. There were some other conditions which I need not advert to as they are not the subject matter of the present controversy. It is submitted that under these circumstances a valid and binding contract came about between the plaintiffs and defendants for sale of immoveable and moveable properties. It is averred that the Agreement is subsisting and the plaintiffs are ready and willing to fulfil the obligations thereunder and to complete the sale.

2. Pursuant to the oral agreement Solicitors for the defendants submitted drafts of the Agreements by letter of 3rd March, 1976 with a request that the same be returned duly approved. Thereafter, there has been exchange of correspondence between the Solicitors representing the plaintiffs and defendants. On 6th May, 1976 a meeting was convened between the parties in the office of the Attorneys for defendant Nos. 1 to 10. Present at the meeting were the defendant No. 1 and Mr. Nicholson representing the defendants along with their Attorneys and plaintiffs were represented by partner Mr. Suresh Agarwal along with Attorney. The broker was also present. The draft Agreements were finalised and it was agreed that they would be engrossed by the Attorneys for the plaintiffs and would be executed by the plaintiffs and forwarded the next day along with the cheques for Rs. 68,000/- and Rs. 3,000/- being earnest money to Attorneys for defendant Nos. 1 to 10. As regards the Agreement to give vacant possession of certain portion of the property, at the instance of defendants it was inter alia agreed that the separate letter signed by all the defendant Nos. 1 to 10 would be given to the plaintiffs representative next day after the cheques as aforesaid were given. It is averred that it was also agreed and arranged that prior to the Attorneys for the plaintiffs forwarding the signed Agreements and the cheques, representative of the defendant Nos. 1 to 10 would inform the plaintiffs about defendants Nos. 1 to 10 having executed the said letter. The plaintiffs accordingly deposited on 7th May, 1976 Rs. 72,000/- with their Attorneys and as arranged, Attorneys for plaintiffs kept the Agreements, Cheques and letters dated 7th May, 1976 ready to be sent to the Attorneys of defendant Nos. 1 to 10. As