Continuous readiness and willingness to perform the contract is essential for specific performance, and the suit must be filed within a reasonable time. Failure to prove continuous readiness and willingness can result in the dismissal of the suit for specific performance.

JUDGMENT

A.M. Dhavale, J. - The aggrieved original defendant has filed this second appeal to challenge the concurrent findings against him. Regular Civil Suit No. 249 of 1982 filed by the respondents herein against the appellants was decreed by judgment dated 15th March, 1990 by First Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Satara and decree for specific performance of re-conveyance deed, for possession and mesne profit was passed. The same was confirmed by Additional District Judge, Satara in Regular Civil Appeal No. 188 of 1990 by judgment dated 10th April, 1997.

2. Heard learned advocate Shri. V.S. Talkute for the appellants and Shri Dilip Bodake for the Respondents. In order to decide this appeal, the material facts are essential:

i) Land at Survey No. 60, Hissa No. 10/B plus Hissa No.10/A at Angapur Tarf-Targaon, Taluka and District Satara admeasuring 1 Acre 37 Guntha bearing Gat No. 491 admeasuring 79-R is the subject matter of the suit and is more particularly described in para 1 of the plaint. Admittedly, the land was belonging to the plaintiff. On 24/01/1963 he has purportedly executed Sale Deed Exh. 26 and thereby sold the suit land to the defendant for consideration of Rs.4,000/-.

ii) Thereafter, on 20th May, 1968 the plaintiff purportedly executed another Sale Deed of the same land in favour of the defendant whereby he recorded that the earlier Sale Deed was a mortgage deed and in addition to the earlier consideration there was payment of Rs.2,000/- and the suit land was sold to the defendant for Rs.6,000/-. On the same day the defendant purportedly executed a Deed of Re-conveyance of the same land (exhibit 56) whereby he agreed to re-convey the suit land in the name of plaintiff subject to refund of Rs.6,000/-. No time limit was fixed. It was recorded that at the end of any year on payment of Rs.6,000/-, the suit land would be re-conveyed.

3. According to the case of the plaintiff the first Sale Deed was in fact a mortgage transaction. The defendant has accepted the said fact and has executed fresh Sale Deed along with Deed of Re-conveyance. The plaintiff was put in possession of the suit land at the time of 2nd Sale Deed. No time limit was fixed for re-conveyance. The plaintiff by notice dated 7th March, 1982 called upon the defendant to execute the re-conveyance.

The defendant by reply dated 8thg March, 1982 declined. Hence, the plaintiff has filed the suit for re-conveyance. The defendant by written statement Exhibit 36 claimed that the said transaction dated 24th January, 1963 was real sale transaction and he has not executed Sale Deed dated 20th May, 1968 and reconveyance deed of the same date. He was in possession of the suit land from 1963. He has developed the said property and since the price of the suit land was considerably increased, due to development the plaintiff has filed false suit.

4. The plaintiff examined himself and one witness, while the defendant examined himself and three witnesses. The learned Civil Judge held that the transaction dated 24th January, 1963 was a mortgage. There was sale transaction in 1968 coupled with agreement for re-conveyance. The plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his contract. The suit was decreed. In the appeal, learned District Judge formulated only single point whether the decree of specific performance of agreement of re-conveyance is sustainable. He answered it in the affirmative and dismissed the appeal.

5. The learned trial Court was very much impressed with the false defence and false answers given by the defendant in which he went on to deny even his signatures on admitted documents like vakalatnama, written statement and Sale Deed of 1963 etc. She held that the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. She relied on the term in the re-conveyance deed that at any time at the end of the year amount can be paid and Sale Deed can be obtained. She further relied on fact that notice Exh. 27 dated 07.03.1982 was issued and the considera