DEEPA SHARMA, J.

1. This Court had framed the issues in this case on 03.09.2013 and issue No. 3 i.e. "Whether Suit is barred under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC? OPD" was treated as preliminary issue.

2. Accordingly, arguments of the parties are heard on this issue.

3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the plaintiff that he could not have filed the suit for specific performance because the last date of performance of the agreement was 15.01.2013 and that there was no repudiation of the contract by the defendant. In support of his contention, he has relied on the case of Inbasegaran and Another vs. S. Natarajan (Dead) through LRs. 2014 XII A.D. (SC) 420 and it is argued that in this case, the Court had held that the subsequent suit for specific performance was maintainable even though the plaintiff had earlier filed a suit for injunction only. It is further argued that the suit for specific performance could not have been filed earlier because the defendant in her letter dated 05.01.2013 extended the time of performance of the agreement by giving plaintiff three more days for the payment of balance money by way of Demand Draft/Pay order.

4. Learned counsel for the defendant has arg