( 1 ) WHAT should be the effect of inability on the part of a party approaching the Court for the equitable relief of specific performance to establish its case in toto at trial ? Will inability to establish the case in toto at trial not amount to the falsity of the case ? In such a case, should the Court grant to that party the relief of specific performance ? these are the main questions arising in this appeal preferred before this Court by original defendant No. 2 in Regular Civil Suit No. 166 of 1975 questioning the correctness of the decision given by the learned District Judge of Valsad at Navsari on 31/01/1981 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1976. Thereby the decision given by the learned Joint Civil Judge (J. D.) at Valsad on 30/01/1978 in Regular Civil Suit No. 166 of 1975 came to be affirmed. It is needless to say that the trial Court decreed the suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale of one immovable property executed between the respondents herein on 16/11/1972. Incidentally, the parties to the litigation culminating into this second appeal are brothers.

( 2 ) RESPONDENT No. 1 was the original plaintiff, respondent No. 2 original defendant N