Point of Law : Court has considered essentialities to establish readiness and willingness of plaintiff approaching a court to obtain a decree for specific performance.

JUDGMENT :

The challenge in the appeal on hand is by the plaintiff against a judgment passed by Additional Sub Judge I, Thiruvananthapuram (for short, 'the trial court') in O.S.No.38 of 1995 declining to grant a decree for specific performance in favour of her. According to the appellant, the trial court has committed a grave error while passing such a judgment and therefore is unjustified.

2. The pleadings of the parties in O.S No.38 of 1995 are very relevant to have an idea about the facts of the case and therefore, a narration is made hereunder in brief. For clarity, the parties will be referred to hereinafter as the plaintiff and the defendant in accordance with their status before the trial court.

3. The land belongs to the defendant was acquired by the Government for expansion of the Bus Terminus of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation at Thampanoor. Consequent to eviction of the defendant, the plaint schedule property together with the right to use the road was assigned to the defendant.

4. K.S.R.T.C fixed a consideration of Rs.75,000/- per cent for the plaint schedule property and vide order passed in Writ Appeal filed as 1107 of 1994 before this Court challenging the same, cost of Rs.75,000/- per cent was maintained and the time for payment was extended upto 03.01.1995.

5. On 01.06.1992 an agreement was executed by the defendant with the plaintiff agreeing to sell the above property for a total consideration of Rs.12,50,000/- and Rs.1,00,000/- was paid as advance sale consideration. As per the terms of agreement for sale, the sale deed shall be executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff within one month from the date on which a certificate of purchase is secured by him and mutation of the property is effected in his name.

6. On 29.12.1994, the defendant had remitted Rs.4,20,615/- to the K.S.R.T.C. The plaintiff demanded the defendant to execute the sale deed but he has given evasive replies in response. The defendant even failed to satisfy the plaintiff that no objection and clearance were obtained from the authorities concerned and also from the income tax authorities. In the context, the plaintiff was constrained to address the Sub-Registry, Chalai and to lodge her protest against registration of a document in respect of property covered by agreement dated 01.06.1992. The defendant vide letter sent on 14.09.1994, had intimated the plaintiff that he is unable to proceed with the agreement unless the terms are revised as suggested by him within seven days. The plaintiff received the letter on 15.09.1994 and sent a reply stating that she cannot vary the conditions unilaterally, that she is ready to pay to K.S.R.T.C the amount due towards sale consideration and in case he failed to execute the sale deed in accordance with the agreement, he will have to meet the consequences arising out of the same. The reply was served on the defendant on 23.09.1994.

7. The plaintiff caused to issue a lawyer notice to the defendant on 17.12.1994 intimating that she is ready and willing to perform her part as per the agreement for sale. The plaintiff had also addressed the Chairman, K.S.R.T.C intimating him that an agreement was executed on 01.06.1992 among herself and the defendant and advance sale consideration was paid and expressed her willingness to remit the balance amount due to the Corporation on handing over possession of the property to her. Protest complaint was also lodged by the plaintiff against registration of the property by the defendant to anyone else. Ultimately the plaintiff realised that the defendant has no intention to execute the sale deed as agreed by him and thereupon the suit in question was filed before District Court seeking specific performance of the agreement. The specific plea of the plaintiff in the suit was that the entire sale consideration was remitted by the defendant to K.S.R.T.C on 29/12/1994 and got the plaint schedule property transferred in his favour, that she is ready and willing to