1. Aggrieved over the Judgment of the First Appellate Court reversing the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court in granting decree for specific performance in favour of the Plaintiff, the present Second Appeal came to be filed. For the sake of convenience, the parties are arrayed as per their own ranking before the trial Court.

2. brief facts leading to file this Second Appeal is as under:

2.(a) It is the case of the Plaintiff that the First Defendant entered into an registered sale agreement of the suit property for a sale consideration of Rs.4,10,000/- on 13.8.2001 and received a sum of Rs.25,000/- from the Plaintiff as advance. It is specifically agreed that the sale shall be completed within three months from the date of agreement. On 9.11.2001 the Plaintiff met the First Defendant at Coimbatore along with balance sale consideration of Rs.3,85,000/- for registering the sale deed. The First Defendant has informed the Plaintiff that the Second and Third Defendants have fabricated a false agreement in the name of the First Defendant and hence the First Defendant filed suit in O.S.No.309 of 2001. Therefore, informed the Plaintiff that after disposal of the above suit he would execute the sale deed. Accordingly, on 11.2.2001 the First Defendant extended another three months time for completion of the sale and made endorsement in the presence of the witnesses. The Plaintiff also came to know that the Second and Third Defendants have obtained Interim Injunction against the First Defendant not to sell the property. The Plaintiff came to know about the above Injunction in the month of December 2001. Since the First Defendant has informed the Plaintiff that the agreement relied upon by the Second and Third Defendants are false and fabricated, the Plaintiff was ready to purchase the suit property by paying remaining sale consideration for which the First Defendant advised him to take legal advise. Accordingly, he took him to First Defendant's Advocate on 26.12.2001. The Advocate has informed the Plaintiff that since there is an Injunction, he cannot purchase the property. Accordingly, the First Defendant agreed that after the vacation of the Injunction he would execute the sale deed.

2.(b) The Plaintiff was always ready and willing to purchase the property. The Injunction order passed by the trial Court was appealed in C.M.A.No.50 of 2002. The said C.M.A. was allowed on 20.4.2004. Thereafter the Plaintiff repeatedly demanded the First Defendant to execute the sale deed. However, the First Defendant dragging the matter. Thereafter, the Plaintiff has met the First Defendant personally on 20.12.2004 and requested him to execute the sale deed. However, he refused to extend the sale agreement further. Hence, the Plaintiff issued legal notice dated 30.12.2004 to all the defendants. The Second and Third Defendants were aware of the agreement dated 13.8.2001. They have not made the Plaintiff as a party to the suit in O.S.No.309 of 2001. The agreement dated 14.02.2001 alleged to have entered between the First to Third Defendants has been fabricated and forged by the defendants. Hence, the Plaintiff has filed suit for Specific Performance.

2.(c) The First Defendant admitting the execution of the sale agreement dated 13.8.2001, but denied the receipt of Rs.25,000/- as advance. It is the contention of the First Defendant that six months prior to 13.08.2001 he has entered into the agreement with Second and Third Defendants for Rs.3,00,000/-on 14.02.2001 and on that date the First Defendant received Rs.2,50,000/- as advance and agreed to complete the sale within 10 months. He has also delivered possession to the Second and Third Defendants. The Plaintiff has approached the First Defendant in the first week of August 2001 and requested to sell the property to him. Even though the Plaintiff was fully aware of the sale agreement in favour of Second and Third Defendants, he offered higher price of Rs.4 lakhs and above and assured the First Defe