In a case of specific performance, time is not the essence of the contract, but the plaintiff must prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform the essential terms of the contract. The court also considers the conduct of the parties to determine readiness and willingness.

1. The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant.

2. The plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale executed by the deceased first defendant and also by his sons alongwith him in favour of the plaintiff/appellant. Both the courts below dismissed the suit and hence, the second appeal is field by the plaintiff/appellant to enforce the agreement of sale.

3. The case of the plaintiff was that the suit property originally belonged to the deceased first defendant and that was taken on lease by the husband of the appellant and he was running a gunny bag business in that premises and on 12.5.1995, the deceased first defendant entered into an agreement to sell the property to the appellant/plaintiff for a sum of Rs.2,40,000/= and the agreement of sale was executed by the first defendant in favour of the appellant and the appellant paid an advance of Rs.40,000/= and as per the agreement of sale, the sale has to be completed within four months by paying the balance sale consideration. Though the appellant was ready to complete the transaction by paying the balance sale consideration, the deceased first defendant was evading to accept the payment and he was coming out with saying that he would execute the sale alongwith his sons and in that pretext, he was gaining time and thereafter, on 6.5.1997, the deceased first defendant received a sum of Rs.1,00,000/= from the appellant and he and his children executed an agreement of sale extending the period and also acknowledged receipt of Rs.1,00,000/= and as per the agreement of sale dated 6.5.1997, the sale has to be completed within a period of three months and as the appellant's husband was in possession of the property and as per the agreement, the appellant/husband was also paying the rent regularly and despite repeated request by the appellant, the respondent did not come forward to execute the sale deed after receiving the balance sale consideration and in July 1999, the property was sough to be attached by the Municipality for non payment of tax and on coming to know of the same, the appellant paid the tax of Rs.21,690/= and thereafter, the appellant came to know that the respondents are trying to sell the property to the third parties and therefore, filed the suit for specific performance on 18.7.1999 and later came to know that respondents 1 to 8 sold the property to the 8th respondent and therefore, he was also impleaded as one of the defendants in the suit and therefore, prayed for decree of the suit.

4. The first defendant died before filing written statement and his legal representatives were added as defendants 2 to 8 and they filed written statement stating the circumstances under which the agreement of sale was executed by their father in favour of the appellant and also stated that the appellant was not having the means to pay the balance sale consideration and that was the reason for her not paying balance sale consideration and even after the extension was granted on 6.5.1997, as per the time granted, the appellant did not come forward to pay the amount and got the document registered and having realised that the appellant is taking advantage of his possession of the property and is not interested in paying the balance sale consideration, the property was sold by the deceased first defendant in favour of the 8th respondent and hence, the appellant is also not entitled to the relief of specific performance. It was further stated that the deceased first defendant requested the appellant's husband to vacate the premises and the husband of the appellant not only refused to vacate the premises but also filed a suit in O.S.No.843 of 1991 for injunction against the deceased first defendant and having realised that the husband of the first defendant cannot be evicted, the deceased first defendant had no other option but to enter into an agreement with the appellant to sell the property but, the appellant did not pay the balance sale considerat