R. Narayana Pisharadi, J.

The appellant is the defendant in the suit O.S.No.403 of 2010 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Palakkad. The respondent in the appeal is the plaintiff in the suit. The parties shall be hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff' and 'the defendant'.

2. The suit was for specific performance of contract. The trial court granted a decree in favour of the plaintiff for specific performance of Ext.A1 agreement for sale of the property owned by the defendant. This appeal is filed by the defendant challenging the judgment and decree passed in the suit.

3. The facts of the case are as follows: The defendant is the owner of the plaint schedule property which is a shop room. On 14/11/2009, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into Ext.A1 agreement for sale of the plaint schedule property. As per this agreement, the plaintiff agreed to purchase the plaint schedule property for a total consideration of Rs.14,40,000/-. At the time of execution of the agreement, the plaintiff paid an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to the defendant as advance towards sale consideration. The balance amount of sale consideration had to be paid by the plaintiff on or before 14/05/2010 and then the defendant had to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff.

4. Thereafter, the defendant sent Ext.A2 lawyer notice dated 14/12/2009 to the plaintiff stating that his brother had filed a suit as O.S.No.284 of 2009 in the Munsiff's Court, Alathur against him and an application was filed in that suit for granting an order of injunction restraining him from selling the plaint schedule property. The defendant also stated in Ext.A2 lawyer notice that Ext.A1 agreement had to be cancelled for the aforesaid reason. Along with Ext.A2 lawyer notice, the defendant sent a cheque for Rs.3,01,500/- drawn in favour of the plaintiff towards repayment of the amount of advance along with interest.

5. The plaintiff then sent Ext.A3 reply notice dated 19/12/2009 to the defendant stating that he is ready and willing to proceed with the agreement and that he is ready to wait till the disposal of the suit O.S. No. 284 of 2009. The plaintiff also reminded the defendant that his son Sheikh Muhammed was a tenant of the plaint schedule shop room from the date 18/08/2009 and that his son had paid an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- as advance to the defendant in the transaction of lease. The plaintiff also returned the cheque sent to him by the defendant.

6. Thereafter, the plaintiff sent Ext.A4 lawyer notice dated 06/05/2010 to the defendant stating that he had arranged the balance sale consideration and that he is ready and willing to get the sale deed executed in his favour. In Ext.A4 lawyer notice, the plaintiff further stated that the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- paid by his son to the defendant as advance in the transaction of lease was outstanding with the defendant and that he is ready to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.8,90,000/- to the defendant.

7. There was no response from the defendant to Ext.A4 lawyer notice sent to him by the plaintiff. The plaintiff then instituted the suit on 11/06/2010 seeking a decree for specific performance of Ext.A1 agreement by the defendant and in the alternative, a decree for realisation of the amount of advance paid by him from the defendant.

8. The defendant filed written statement admitting the execution of Ext.A1 agreement for sale of the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff. He also admitted having received Rs.3,00,000/- from the plaintiff as advance towards sale consideration at the time of execution of Ext.A1 agreement. However, he contended that he was not in a position to sell the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff in view of the pendency of the suit filed against him by his brother. The defendant also contended that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part under Ext.A1 agreement and that there was no cause of action for the suit.

9. The trial court fr