JUDGMENT :

(V.M. Velumani, J.)

(Prayer: This First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of C.P.C. Read With Order XLI Rule 1 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 03.07.2020 made in O.S.No.130 of 2013 on the file of the Principal District Court, Kancheepuram at Chengalpattu.)

1. The appellants are defendants in O.S.No.130 of 2013 on the file of the Principal District Court, Kancheepuram at Chengalpattu. They filed the present appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 03.07.2020, granting specific performance in favour of the respondent.

Facts of the case :-

2. The respondent filed O.S.No.130 of 2013 for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 04.07.2006 in respect of suit property and permanent injunction. According to the respondent, the 1st appellant is owner of 18 cents and 2nd appellant is owner of 17 cents of suit property situated at No.150, Medavakkam Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District in Survey No.427/1, described in the schedule to the plaint. The appellants were in need of funds and they are unable to defend the suit filed against one D.Balaraman. They decided to sell the suit property to the respondent. After discussions, the respondent and appellants entered into an agreement of sale on 04.07.2006. The total sale consideration was fixed at Rs.52 Lakhs and respondent paid an advance of Rs.10 Lakhs on the date of agreement. The appellants admitted and acknowledged the same. The balance sale consideration of Rs.42 Lakhs is to be paid within 4 months from the date of agreement, but the same is subject to Clause 13 of agreement of sale dated 04.07.2006. As per Clause 13, the agreement is subject to result of any appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated 07.03.2006 passed in O.S.No.639 of 2001 on the file of Principal Sub Court, Chengalpattu.

2(i). The respondent was always ready and willing to pay the balance sale consideration. D.Balaraman, the defendant in O.S.No.639 of 2001 filed A.S.No.89 of 2006 on the file of the Principal District Court, Chengalpet and the same was dismissed by the judgment and decree dated 29.11.2010. S.A.No.1615 of 2011 filed by the said D.Balaraman was also dismissed by this Court on 06.08.2012, confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.639 of 2001.

2(ii). The appellants did not have sufficient funds to defend the above litigation. The respondent, as agreement holder, has to fight the litigation on behalf of appellants and funded the litigation up to this Court. Apart from paying the advance amount of Rs.10 Lakhs, the respondent further paid a sum of Rs.28 Lakhs on various dates viz., from 04.10.2006 to 17.12.2011. Thus, the respondent has paid a total sum of Rs.38 Lakhs.

2(iii). After dismissal of Second Appeal in August, 2012, the respondent was trying to contact the appellants to pay the balance sale consideration and complete the sale deed and to take possession of the property through Court where Execution Petition was pending before the Sub Court, Tambaram. But, the appellants were evasive. The respondent got the copy of the judgment of this Court passed in Second Appeal on 15.04.2013 and made attempts to meet the appellants in person and tried to communicate the appellants through telephone, mobile phone, but they were evasive. The respondent came to know that the appellants were taking steps to sell the suit property to third parties and various brokers and politicians were contacting the respondent and negotiating on behalf of the appellants. The respondent has paid a sum of Rs.38 Lakhs and is willing to deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs.17 Lakhs before the Court. The respondent also paid the appellants in getting their property and fight the litigation up to this Court.

2(iv). The respondent has sufficient means and is in possession of sufficient funds, both in Bank as well as by immovable property. He is always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. The respondent engaged an Advocate in Sub Court, Chengal