The central legal point established in the judgment is the impact of the Agreement of Sale on the rights of the parties in jointly purchased properties and the entitlement to benefits under Section 53(A) of the Transfer of Property Act.

M. SATHYANARAYANAN, J.

1. By consent, both the Second Appeals are taken up for final disposal as the impugned Judgments passed by the Lower Appellate Court, which are the subject matter of challenge, have been dealt with and disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The facts leading to the filing of this Second Appeal, briefly narrated, are as follows:-

S.A. No. 219/2017:-

(a) The defendant-brother of the respondent/plaintiff, who lost before the Courts below, is the appellant herein.

(b) The respondent/plaintiff instituted a suit in O.S. No. 350/1998 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Perambalur, against the appellant/defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs. 24,000/- being the value of 50% of the yield of the Paddy cultivated during the year 1997-1998 in the suit property.

(c) It is the case of the respondent/plaintiff that the defendant is his brother and the suit properties were jointly purchased by them and though he demanded partition and separate possession of his share, it was refused to be acceded and therefore, filed O.S. No. 251/1997 on the file of the very same Court and it is pending. It is further contended by the respondent/plaintiff that during May 1997, the respondent/plaintiff has cultivated Ponni Paddy and harvested the same during January February, 1998 and in respect of his share, i.e. 60 bags of Paddy, the defendant did not give it and he has also sold the plaintiff's share and earned a sum of Rs. 24,000/- and as such, the respondent/plaintiff is entitled to the same and hence, came forward to file the suit.

(d) The defendant/appellant has filed a written statement, denying the averments and would contend that though the suit properties were jointly purchased and subsequently, an Agreement of Sale dated 27.12.1996 (Ex.B1) came into being, wherein, the respondent/ plaintiff had agreed to convey half of his share for a consideration of Rs. 1,00,000/- and on the date of agreement, received an advance amount of Rs. 75,000/- and though the defendant/appellant was willing to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs. 25,000/- it was refused to be received by the respondent/plaintiff herein for the reasons best known to him and as such, the defendant is having right, title and possession in respect of the suit properties and therefore, the claim made by the plaintiff is wholly untenable and prays for dismissal of the suit.

S.A. No. 220/2017:-

(a) The defendant, the brother of the respondent/plaintiff, who lost before the Courts below, is the appellant herein.

(b) The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for partition in O.S. No. 251/1997, contending among other things, that the suit properties were jointly purchased on 06.01.1992 and 05.10.1995 respectively and since both the plaintiff and the defendant are employees of the Government, they engaged the services of the agricultural coolies to carry on the cultivation activities and necessary expenses have also been met out jointly. It is further averred by the respondent/plaintiff that during March 1997, IR 20 Paddy was planted and though the respondent/plaintiff is entitled to 50% of the yield and the value, the appellant/ defendant did not give the same and had taken the entire yield and value and on account of the said dispute, the respondent/plaintiff demanded partition and separate possession of his half share and it was refused to be acceded by the appellant/defendant and therefore, the respondent/plaintiff came forward to file the present suit in O.S. No. 251/1997, seeking one-half of his share by passing a preliminary decree and also for mesne profits and cost of the suit.

(c) The appellant/defendant filed his written statement, denying the averments made in the plaint and would contend that though the suit properties were purchased jointly, in the light of the agreement dated 27.12.1996, the respondent/plaintiff has agreed to convey half of the share and also received a sum of Rs. 75,000/- towards advance and also put him in possession of the propertie