SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3257

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.T. ASHA, J.
T. Subramani - Appellant
Versus
N.V. Karuppaiya - Respondent
S.A. No. 475 of 2022
Decided On : 15-09-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:P. Jagadeesan, Advocate. For the Respondent:D. Shivakumaran, Advocate.

Proof of continuous readiness and willingness, and genuineness of the sale agreement are crucial for a claim of specific performance.

Headnote:

Specific Performance - Suit Agreement - C.P.C. Section 100 - Ex.A1 - 10.01.2007 - 18 months - Rs.2,00,000 - Rs.1,90,000 - Rs.10,000 - Ex.A1 - Ex.A2 - 28.11.2010 - 10.07.2008 - Ex.A1 - 21.02.2017 - Serial Number 4275 - 10.01.2007 - exhibit A1 - 21.01.2007 - exhibit A1 - Second Appeal dismissed

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale deed. The defendant contested, claiming the agreement was not intended to be a sale and the property was ancestral. The plaintiff alleged readiness and willingness to perform the contract, but the defendant disputed the genuineness of the agreement.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract, and the genuineness of the agreement was in doubt due to discrepancies in the dates on the sale agreement and stamp paper. The Second Appeal was dismissed, confirming the lower court's judgment and decree.

Issues: Genuineness of the sale agreement, plaintiff's entitlement to specific performance, and other reliefs.

Ratio Decidendi: The plaintiff's failure to demonstrate continuous readiness and willingness, coupled with doubts about the genuineness of the sale agreement, led to the dismissal of the appeal.

Final Decision: The Second Appeal was dismissed, affirming the lower court's judgment and decree.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the Judgement and Decree dated 01.04.2021 passed in A.S.No.18 of 2018 on the file of the Sessions (Fast Track Mahila) Judge, Namakkal confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 01.02.2018 passed in O.S.No.416 of 2010 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Namakkal.)

1. The unsuccessful plaintiff who has lost before the Courts below in a suit for specific performance has filed the above appeal, the same has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

''1) Whether the Lower Courts right in holding that the plaintiff failed to prove the due execution of the suit Agreement Ex.A1, especially, when the defendant categorically admitted his signature found in Ex.A1?

2) Whether or not the plaintiff proved the execution of Ex.A1 by examining the attestor of the document as PW2, who has spoken eloquently about the execution of the suit Sale Agreement Ex.A1?

3) Whether the Lower Courts right in holding that the plaintiff has not proved his readiness and willingness to perform his part of Contract, especially when he has paid almost the entire sale consideration and he issued the legal notice within the period of limitation calling upon the defendant to execute the Sale Deed in his favour?

4)Whether or not the Lower Courts right in not even considering the prayer for grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the suit property?''

2. The brief facts which are necessary for disposing the second appeal are as follows and the parties are referred to in the same ranking as before the trial Court:

The plaintiff has filed the suit in O.S.No.416 of 2010 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Namakkal for specific performance of the agreement of sale deed dated 10.01.2007. It is the case of the plaintiff that under this agreement the plaintiff had agreed to purchase the suit property belonging to the defendant for a total sale consideration of Rs.2,00,000/-. On the date of the agreement Rs.1,90,000/- was paid as advance and 18 months time was fixed for paying the balance sale consideration of Rs.10,000/- and to have a sale deed executed. The plaintiff would contend that the he has always ready and willing to perform his contract and the defendant was reluctant to do so. The plaintiff issued a legal notice on 28.11.2010 for which there was no response. The plaintiff also came to learn that the defendant was taking steps to sell the property to some third party. The defendant had filed a written statement inter-alia contending that the agreement of sale executed in favour of the plaintiff was not intended to be a sale and that apart the property in question was an ancestral property in which the defendant had an undivided share. The defendant has executed a settlement deed in favour of his wife on 28.07.2010 and she has no right in that property.

3. The defendant would further submit that the documents had been tampered with and an additional written statement was filed by the defendant contending that the plaintiff and he were friends. As the plaintiff was carrying on a money lending business the defendant had borrowed Rs.50,000/- on 21.02.2007 and had signed 2 blank twenty rupees stamp papers and two blank papers.

4. The defendant submitted that he had repaid the amount borrowed with interest on 21.08.2007 and although he insisted upon the plaintiff to return the blank papers signed by him, however, the plaintiff kept on buying time. It is with these papers that he has created these documents. The defendant would further submit that he has settled the property on his wife and the revenue Records has been mutated in her name.

5. The Trial Court has framed the following issues:

i) Whether this suit sale agreement is true and genuine?

ii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of specific performance?

iii) To what other relief the plaintiff is entitled to?

6. The plaintiff ha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top