Honble PASAYAT, J.–The defendant in a suit for specific performance of contract questions correctness of the judgment rendered by a Full Bench of the Kerala High Court holding that the plaintiff-respondent no.1 is entitled to a decree in the manner prayed for. Though the Trial Court held that the requirements of Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (in short the Act) were not complied with and plaintiff was entitled only to the money paid, in appeal by the plaintiff, learned Single Judge of the High Court as well as in appeal before the Full Bench of the High Court, held otherwise. Plaintiffs suit for specific performance was decreed.

(2). The factual background as highlighted by the original plaintiff, who after his death was substituted by additional plaintiffs nos. 2 to 5 (respondents herein) is essentially as follows :

The suit was filed by the plaintiff for specific performance of Ext. A1 agreement for sale. His case is that the defendant executed Ext.A1 agreement in his favour agreeing to sell the suit property for a consideration of Rs.12,000/-. An advance of Rs.8,000/- was paid on the date of the agreement i.e. 15.2.1978. The period fixed for the execution of the sa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document