The plaintiffs being the proposed purchasers cannot remain inactive without performing anything towards their part of the contract.

This appeal is focussed as against the judgement and decree dated 27. 1995 passed in O.S.No.193 of 1991 by the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode, Periyar District.

2. Narratively but precisely, broadly but briefly the case of the plaintiffs as stood exposited from the plaint could be portrayed thus:-

.(a) The deceased Rangaswami gounder and his wife D1-Ponnammal and their children, namely defendants 2 to 8 entered into the suit agreement to sell with the plaintiffs dated 23. 1987, whereby the plaintiffs agreed to purchase from the defendants the suit property measuring an extent of 3 acres of land for a sum of Rs.3,48,000/-. The stipulations contained therein are to the effect that the plaintiffs should carve out plots and sell them to various persons and pay the proportionate amounts as and when they receive the sale consideration from the purchasers of the plots, in addition to the condition that the plaintiffs also at their discretion purchase, on outright basis the entire suit property as one lot. The time stipulated for performance was one year.

(b) The plaintiffs, in commensurate with the agreement to sell, effected changes in the land, so as to make it fit for being sold as contemplated supra and the plaintiffs have been ready and willing to perform their part of the contract. To their surprise and shock the land owners sent a registered notice dated 23. 1988 calling upon the plaintiffs to complete the sale transactions on or before 23. 1988 and they intended to make the time as the essence of the contract. A corrigendum was also sent by them incorporating the schedule of property, which was earlier left out in their notice.

.(c) The plaintiffs sent a reply narrating as to how the defendants notices were defective, that the earlier notice reached beyond the date stipulated for performance and that as per the said agreement, time was not the essence of contract.

.(d) The plaintiffs were put in possession of the suit property under the said agreement to sell by way of part performance. The plaintiffs issued notice dated 23. 1991 calling upon the defendants to be present at 10.00 a.m on 23. 1991 at the Sub-Registrar office concerned for executing the sale deed after receiving the remaining part of the sale consideration, however, the defendants did not comply with the request of the plaintiffs.

3. Remonstrating and refuting, gain saying and impugning the allegations/averments in the plaint D3 filed the written statement, which was adopted by the other defendants, the pith and marrow of it would run thus:

.(i) As per the agreement to sell, the period of performance was one year and it could be extended by six months more for getting approval of lay out for carving out plots and selling the same.

.(ii) The plaintiffs have not raised their little finger to perform their part of the contract and absolutely no steps were taken in concinnity with the stipulation contained in the agreement to sell.

(iii) The incessant demands made by the defendants to the plaintiffs to get the sale deed executed from the plaintiffs ended in a fiasco. Time was intended to be the essence of contract. The defendants suitably replied to the plaintiffs lawyers notice dated 23. 1991 highlighting that the plaintiffs had lost their right to seek for specific performance. However, the defendants also made themselves available at the registrars office on 23. 1991, as requested by the plaintiffs in their said notice, but the plaintiffs did not turn up.

(iv) The plaintiffs are not ready and willing to perform their part of the contract.

Accordingly, the defendants prayed for the dismissal of the suit.

4. The gist and kernal of the additional written statement filed by the defendants would be to the effect that the plaintiffs were in the habit of entering into such agreements and thereafter abandon the same. The plaintiffs, by their own conduct, abandoned and waived the rights under the contract. Accordingly, they prayed for dis