A. SELVAM, J.

1. This Appeal Suit has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 10.2.2015, passed in O.S.No.842 of 2008, by the First Additional District Court, Coimbatore.

2. The respondents 1 to 3 herein, as plaintiffs, have instituted Original Suit No.842 of 2008, on the file of the trial Court, praying to pass a decree of specific performance in pursuance of the suit sale agreement dated 02.07.2008.

3. The material averments made in the plaint are that the suit property is the absolute property of the defendants 1 to 3 and they derived title to the same by virtue of Settlement Deed dated 18.3.2003. The defendants 1 to 3 have agreed to sell the same in favour of the plaintiffs on the basis of Rs.1,22,000/- per cent. The plaintiffs have paid an advance amount of Rs.6 lakhs. Further it is agreed that within a period of four months, the defendants 1 to 3 have to execute a registered Sale Deed in favour of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are always ready and willing to perform their part of contract. On several occasions, the plaintiffs have approached the defendants 1 to 3 for getting a registered sale deed. On 31.10.2008, the plaintiffs have issued a telegram to the defendants 1 to 3 whereby directed them to execute a registered sale deed. The defendants 1 to 3 have given a false reply notice and also created a sale deed in favour of the 4th defendant. Under the said circumstances, the present suit has been instituted for the relief sought therein.

4. In the written statement filed on the side of the defendants 1 to 3, it is averred that the defendants have never agreed to sell the suit property in favour of the plaintiffs and no agreement of sale has come into existence. The defendants have not received the alleged advance amount of Rs.6 lakhs from the plaintiffs. The husband of the first defendant, by name, Velusamy, has fallen in illness. For the purpose of medical expenses, Rs.1 lakh is required. Under the said circumstances, the first defendant has approached one Palanisamy and he has given assurance to get loan. Under the said circumstances, the first defendant has met the first plaintiff. The first plaintiff has directed the first defendant to get signatures of the defendants 2 and 3 and also their husbands on blank stamp papers and accordingly, signatures have been obtained from the defendants 1 to 3 and also from their husbands. The first plaintiff has advanced a loan of Rs.1 lakh. In the telegram dated 31.10.2008, no particulars are found place as to for whom such a telegram has been given. But the defendants 1 to 3 have given a proper reply notice. The plaintiffs 1 to 3 have utilized blank stamp papers, where the signatures of the defendants 1 to 3 are found place and falsely created the suit sale agreement. The defendants 1 to 3 have sold the suit property in favour of the 4th defendant by virtue of a sale deed dated 18.09.2008. There is no merit in the suit and the same deserves to be dismissed.

5. The material averments made in the written statement filed by the 4th defendant are that the suit property is the absolute property of the defendants 1 to 3 by virtue of Settlement Deed dated 18.3.2003. On 19.02.2008, the defendants 1 to 3 have executed a sale agreement in favour of the 4th defendant and an advance amount of Rs.2 lakhs has been given. The 4th defendant has subsequently purchased the suit property. The fourth defendant has not known the alleged sale agreement. From the date of purchase, he is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property and there is no merit in the suit and the same deserves to be dismissed.

6. On the basis of the rival pleadings raised on either side, the trial Court has framed necessary issues and after analysing both oral and documentary evidence, 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 1 to 4.

7. The consistent case of the plaintiffs is