The plaintiff appeals from the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, Ottacamund, dated 31st December, 1954, in O.S. No. 226 of 1952, on his file. The plaintiff prayed for a decree directing the defendant to execute and register a deed of release or, in the alternative, an instrument of conveyance in respect of the defendant’s undivided 1/6th share in the property known as Wakefield Estate, Nilgiris. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the plaintiff’s suit. Hence the appeal.

On 13th September, 1946, the plaintiff-defendant and four others entered into the agreement Exhibit A-1. The document states that each of those six persons owned an undivided 1/6th share in the Wakefield Estate. The defendant and the four others agreed under that document to sell each his undivided 1/6th share in the estate to the plaintiff in consideration of his paying to each of them Rs. 10,000. Rs. 1,000 was paid on the date of the agreement. Paragraph 3 of the agreement states:

"The purchaser will pay the balance of the purchase money, viz., Rs. Nine Thousand only to each of the vendors on or before the 10th day of October, 1946 and on payment of the balance of the purchase money, each of the vendors will execute and register in favour of the purchaser or his nominee a proper and valid conveyance of their sixth undivided share in the aforesaid premises known as the Wakefield Estate subject to the liabilities hereinbefore mentioned and deliver possession of their share to the purchaser. The costs of stamp on the conveyance and registration charges and purchaser’s Solicitors fees will be borne by the purchaser. And the purchaser will pay and discharge the liability under the mortgage indenture and under the aforesaid promissory note for Rs. Fifty-nine thousand only and all other liabilities payable in respect of the said Wakefield Estate."

The promissory note referred to in that paragraph is the note, which had been executed by all the six persons in favour of one Ricobthas Fathaimull &38; Company for Rs. Fifty-nine thousand. Paragraph 5 of the agreement is in these terms:

" If the vendors should fail to execute and register the conveyance when called upon, purchaser will be either entitled to claim the refund of the deposit of Rs. One Thousand only from each of the vendors with interest at nine per cent. per annum from date of payment till date of repayment or to specifically enforce the agreement against the vendors".

The balance of Rs. 9,000 payable out of the price to each of the five vendors named in Exhibit A-1 was duly paid by the plaintiff on 10th October, 1946. Exhibit A-6 is the receipt granted by the defendant acknowledging receipt of Rs. 9,000.

The defendant and the four other vendors did not immediately execute a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff but sent to him the letter Exhibit B-3, which is in these terms:

We shall execute the conveyance in respect of our one-fifth share within thirty days from this date as soon as you have arranged to release us from our liability to Messrs. Ricobthas Fathaimull &38; Co. under the promissory note, dated 15th August, 1946, as you obtained back the receipts issued by us six persons to 19 persons for Rs. 9,500 each".

The letter was signed by the defendant and three others on 10th October, 1946, and by the fifth vendor on 16th October, 1946.

The plaintiff alleged in the plaint that in July, 1949, he and the vendors (defendant and the four others) agreed that, in the place of a deed of conveyance, each of the vendors would execute a deed of release, and that, in pursuance of that oral agreement, three of the vendors had executed release deeds and had had them duly registered and that the fourth vendor being dead his legal representatives had agreed to execute and get registered a deed of release. In regard to the defendant, the plaintiff alleged that he had executed a release deed Exhibit A-2 in favour of the plaintiff on 30th October, 1949. The release was, however, not registered. The plaintif