The present second appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the final judgment and order delivered by the Additional District Judge, Nashik in Civil Appeal No.326 of 1995 who allowed the appeal of the respondent arising out of the judgment and order passed by the IXth Joint Civil Judge, Nasik dismissing the suit being Regular Civil Suit No.900 of 1981 filed by the respondent.

2. The present appellant is the original defendant and the respondent is the origmal plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No.900 of 1981. For the sake of convenience, I am referring the parties as plaintiff and defendant.

FACTUAL MATRIX

3. The facts giving rise to this second appeal arc as under:-

The original plaintiff filed a civil suit for specific performance of a contract dated 19th January. 1966. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit property is an agricultural land of village Samangaon of Gat No.177 admeasuring I Hector 99 R. The suit land is owned by the defendant. The defendant agreed to sell the suit property to the plaintiff for a consideration of Rs. 2,500/- and entered into an agreement dated 19th January. 1966. The defendant accepted Rs. 1,100/- towards the earnest money. It is the further case of the plaintiff that on the same day the defendant handed over the possession of the suit land to the plaintiff and since then the suit property is in actual possession of the plaintiff and the plaintiff is cultivating the same.

4. The plaintiff averred that in the said agreement between the plaintiff and defendant, there was a condition that after obtaining the necessary permission for sale, the defendant will execute the sale deed of the suit land and the remaining balance amount will be paid at the time of execution of the sale deed. It is further pleaded by the plaintiff that the defendant had received the balance amount from time to time from the plaintiff, but did not comply with the condition laid down m the said agreement. The defendant did not obtain the necessary permission for sale of the suit land. The plaintiff met the defendant on several occasions and asked to fulfill the condition of execution of sale as laid down in the said agreement. But the defendant did not comply with the same.

5. Lastly, the plaintiff issued one registered notice dated 27th August. 1981 and asked the defendant to execute the sale deed as per the agreement. The defendant received the said notice and replied it on 14th September, 1981 and refused to execute the sale deed of the suit property. Hence the plaintiff filed the aforesaid civil suit for specific performance of contract dated 19th January. 1966.

6. The suit summons were served upon the defendant. But the defendant neither appeared before the court nor filed her written statement. Hence the suit was proceeded against the defendant without written statement vide order dated 9th August, 1982.

7. On the basis of aforesaid pleadings of the plaintiff, the lower Court framed the following points for its determination:-

(1) Whether the plaintiff proves that an agreement dated 19th January, 1966 is binding upon the defendant?

(2) Whether the plaintiff proves that he has paid full consideration to the defendant as claimed?

(3) Whether the suit is within limitation?

(4) Is the plaintiff entitled for execution of sale deed of the suit property as claimed?

(5) Whether statutory permission is obtained as sought?

(6) What order and decree?

The learned trial Judge recorded his findings for the Points Nos. 1. 2, 3, 4, 5 in the negative and ultimately dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.

8. While dealing with the claim of the plaintiff, the lower court had taken into consideration the testimony of the plaintiff at Exhibit 10 and the affidavit filed by him at Exhibit 8 in support of his claim. The plaintiff has produced 7/12 extracts in respect of the suit land at Exhibits 12 and 13. He has also produced agreement between him and the defendant at Exhibit II. The plaintiff has also produced the copy of the no