K.K Sasidharan, J.

Introduction:

Whether a plaintiff who failed to deposit the balance sale consideration for a period of four years after obtaining lodgment schedule from the trial Court to deposit the amount, which was a pre-condition for instituting a suit for specific performance as per the Agreement entered into between the parties, and made the trial Court to believe that such deposit was in fact made, can be said to be a person who was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and entitled for an equitable remedy of specific performance, is the core question to be decided in this first appeal.

2. Challenge in this first appeal is to the Judgment and Decree dated 4. 1995 in O.S. No. 116 of 1991 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Tindivanam, whereby and whereunder a Decree for specific performance was granted in favour of the respondent/plaintiff.

3. The parties to this appeal are hereinafter referred to as plaintiff and Defendants as per their status before the trial Court.

Background facts:

The Plaint:

4. The suit in O.S. No. 116 of 1991 was instituted by the plaintiff against the Defendants praying for a Decree of specific perform