N. Sathish Kumar, J.

Aggrieved over the judgment and decree passed by the learned District Judge, District Court No. II, Kancheepuram in granting specific performance, the present appeal came to be filed by the defendant in the suit.

2. The parties are arrayed as per their ranking before the trial Court for the sake of convenience.

3. The brief facts of the plaintiff case is as follows :

The plaintiff is carrying on real estate business of promoting and developing the lands in and around Chennai and to form layouts of the plots and selling the plots to the prospective purchasers. The defendant is the owner of the suit property and agreed to sell the same to the plaintiff for a total sale consideration of Rs. 11,05,000/- on 05.09.2005 and received an advance of Rs. 10,000/- on that day. The defendant has also agreed to hand over all the original documents to the plaintiff and arrange for survey of the property and to get the approval from the Government authorities. The time stipulated in the agreement is 90 days for completion of the contract. However, the same is not the essence of the contract. The plaintiff is always ready and willing for completing his part of the contract, but the defendant failed to receive the balance said sale consideration and execute the sale deed. On several occasions, the plaintiff representatives and Managing Director of the Plaintiff company himself personally approached the defendant and demanded to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. But the defendant failed to receive the balance sale consideration and execute the sale deed. Therefore, the plaintiff issued a legal notice dated 08.12.2006 calling upon him to receive the balance sale consideration and execute the sale deed. However, the legal notice was refused to be received by the defendant. After legal notice, the defendants also took a demand draft on 13.12.2006 drawn on J & K Bank Ltd., Mount Road Branch, for Rs. 8 lakhs in favour of the defendant and agreed to pay the remaining sale consideration of Rs. 2,95,000/- at the time of registration of the sale deed. But the defendant failed to receive the same. The defendant taking advantage of the hike in land price demanded more amount. Hence, the suit.

4. The brief contentions of the written statement filed by the defendant :

Denying the execution of the agreement, it is the contention of the defendant, that he never intended to sell his property at any point of time. When the defendant was in dire need of funds, approached the plaintiff's representative for availing a loan of Rs. 10,000/- on 05.08.2005. The representative of the plaintiff got the signature of the defendant in a plank stamp paper and paid the amount of Rs. 10,000/-. The defendant never executed any sale agreement. The properties are his ancestral properties and he has no right to execute the sale deed regarding the entire properties. The plaintiff has not come to the court with clean hands. He has obtained the signature of the defendant in blank papers. It is also contended by the defendant that the plaintiff has never approached the plaintiff to perform his part of the contract and the defendant is also not aware of the demand draft taken by him. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the suit.

5. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues were framed by the trial court.

1. Whether the defendant has executed the sale agreement dated 05.09.2005 agreeing to sell the suit property to the plaintiff for a sale consideration of Rs. 11,05,000/- and received an advance of Rs. 10,000/- on that day?

2. Whether time is essence of the contract?

3. Whether plaintiff is always ready and willing to perform their part of the contract ?

4. Whether the stamp paper signed by the defendant which is for Rs. 10,000/- is for the loan amount?

5. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of specific performance?

6. To what relief?

6. On the side of the plaintiff, P.W.1 and 2 were examined and Ex.A.1 to A.8 were marked. On the