A. Selvam, J.

This appeal suit has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 29-01-2006 passed in O.S.No.111 of 2011 by the IV Additional District Court, Ponneri.

2. The respondent herein as plaintiff has instituted O.S.No.111 of 2011 on the file of the Trial Court praying to pass a decree of specific performance in pursuance of the sale agreement dated 12-01-2008 and also for the relief of perpetual injunction wherein the present appellants have been arrayed as defendants.

3. The epitome of the plaint may be stated like thus:

The suit properties are originally belonged to one Perumal and he purchased the same by virtue of several sale deeds and he passed away on 20-12-1995. The first defendant is his wife and second defendant is his son. After his demise, a family partition has taken place by virtue of a registered partition deed dated 26-05-2004. In the said partition, the suit properties have been allotted jointly in favour of the defendants 1 and 2 and five daughters of the said Perumal. After partition, the second defendant and five daughters of Perumal have settled their shares in the suit properties in favour of the first defendant by virtue of a settlement deed dated 12-07-2004. The plaintiff has been doing real estate business and he evinced interest in purchasing the suit properties. The plaintiff has approached the defendants and expressed his willingness to purchase the suit property at the rate of Rs.4000/- per cent of land and total sale consideration comes to Rs.21,48,000/- (Rupees Twenty One lakhs forty eight thousand only). The defendants have also expressed their willingness to sell the suit properties in favour of the plaintiff. On the basis of mutual agreement, the plaintiff has paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten lakhs only) and subsequently, the plaintiff has paid a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only). Further, it is agreed that the defendants would execute a sale agreement only in respect of Rs.17,00,000/- (Rupees Seventeen lakhs only). On 12-11-2008, the defendants have executed a sale agreement in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has also paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. During February 2011, the plaintiff has decided to enclose the entire suit properties by way of erecting posts. The plaintiff has also received advance from 10 to 20 persons. The plaintiff has always shown his readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract. But the defendants have evaded in executing sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. During first week of October 2011, the defendants have tried to trespass into the suit property. On 04-10-2011, the plaintiff has gone to the house of the defendants and offered the balance of sale consideration. But the defendants have failed to receive the same. Under the said circumstances, the present suit has been instituted for the reliefs sought therein.

4. In the written statement filed on the side of the defendants it is averred that the plaintiff has conveniently suppressed the real facts. In fact, the defendants have borrowed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) from the plaintiff in the month of July 2006. At the time of giving loan, the plaintiff has obtained the signatures of the defendants on various blank papers. The defendants have approached the plaintiff for repaying the said loan of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only). But the plaintiff has refused to handover the documents which have been received by him from the defendants. The plaintiff has filed the present suit with ulterior motive and there is no merit in the suit and the same deserves to be dismissed.

5. On the basis of the rival pleadings raised on either side and after analysing both the oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court has decreed the suit as prayed for. Against the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, the present appeal suit has been preferred at the instance of the defendants as appellants.

6. The consistent case of the plaintiff is that the s