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

2024 Supreme(Mad) 180

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
Lakshmi - Appellant
Versus
S. Pasuvarasu - Respondent
A.S. No. 342 of 2017 & C.M.P. No. 12934 of 2017
Decided On : 03-01-2024

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants:C. Jagadish, S. Senthil, Advocates. For the Respondent:N. Manokaran, Advocate.

The plaintiff must prove the genuineness of the agreement for sale, establish readiness and willingness to perform the contract, and file suit within a reasonable time for specific performance.

Headnote:

specific performance - agreement for sale - 2015 SCC 705, 2000 10 SCC 636 - The court dismissed the suit for specific performance as the plaintiff failed to prove the genuineness of the agreement for sale, failed to establish readiness and willingness to perform the contract, and the suit was barred by limitation.

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance, claiming that the defendant agreed to sell a property to the plaintiff and received a total sum of Rs.15,00,000 as part of the sale consideration. The defendant denied the agreement and claimed it was a loan transaction.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the genuineness of the agreement for sale, establish readiness and willingness to perform the contract, and the suit was barred by limitation.

Issues: (i) Whether the agreement for sale was executed by the defendant? (ii) Whether the plaintiff filed suit within reasonable time for specific performance? (iii) Whether the plaintiff proved her readiness and willingness to perform her part of the contract?

Ratio Decidendi: The plaintiff failed to prove the genuineness of the agreement for sale, establish readiness and willingness to perform the contract, and the suit was barred by limitation.

Final Decision: The appeal suit is dismissed.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Appeal Suit filed under Section 96 of C.P.C., praying that the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.183 of 2013 dated 29.04.2017, on the file of the Principal District Court, Namakkal, may kindly be set aside and the appeal be allowed with costs throughout.)

1. The appeal suit has been filed as against the judgment and decree dated 29.04.2017, passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Namakkal, in O.S.NO.183 of 2013, thereby dismissing the suit for specific performance.

2. The plaintiff is the appellant and the defendant is the respondent. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the trial Court.

3. The suit is for specific performance. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit property belonged to the defendant. He agreed to sell the property to the plaintiff for the sale price of Rs.1,100/- per sq.ft., to the total extent of 1453½ sq.ft., comprised in survey No.30/2F-2 situated at Kondichettipatti Village, Namakkal Taluk. Accordingly, they entered into agreement for sale on 03.11.2008 and paid a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as an advance. The time fixed for the performance of contract was three months from the date of the agreement for sale. The defendant also agreed and handed over the original parent deeds.

3.1. Subsequent to the sale agreement, the plaintiff had paid various amounts viz., on 05.12.2008 a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was paid to the defendant and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was paid on 19.02.2009, by way of cheque. Thereafter, on 03.04.2009, the plaintiff had paid a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- by way of chque. While pending final decree application in O.S.No.1649 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Namakkal, another sum of Rs.3,00,000/- was paid on 31.05.2009. On receipt of the same, the defendant assured that the sale deed will be executed within a period of two months from the date of final decree in O.S.No.1649 of 2004. Finally, on 18.02.2010, further sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was paid in favour of the defendant. Except the last payment, other payments were endorsed in the agreement for sale. In total, the plaintiff paid a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- as part of the sale consideration to purchase the suit property. However, suppressing the said fact, the defendant attempted to sell property to the third party. Therefore, the plaintiff caused notice on 05.11.2013 and thereafter filed the present suit.

4. Resisting the same, the defendant filed written statement stating that, the defendant is doing bike mechanic and consulting business. After purchasing the suit property, he obtained loan and constructed a house. He had acquittance with the husband of the plaintiff who is having lorry body building business and also poultry form in front of the defendant's shop. The defendant used to borrow money from the husband of the plaintiff for his business purpose. While borrowing loan in the year 2008, the defendant signed blank pronote, Cheques and other blank stamp papers. While borrowing loan, he also handed over the original sale deed for security purpose. In the stamp paper, the plaintiff also obtained left thump impression of the defendant. In fact, the defendant came to understand about the final decree application pending in O.S.No.1649 of 2004, only on receipt of the summon in the final decree application from the District Munsif Court, Namakkal. Therefore, in order to grab the property in the name of the plaintiff, her husband colluded and fabricated the agreement for sale and filed the suit. At no point of time, the defendant offered to sell the suit property to the plaintiff.

5. After completion of pleadings, the trial Court framed the following issues:-

    (i) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for a decree of specific performance directing the defendant to execute the sale deed as per agreement dated 03.11.2008 for Rs.15,98,850/- by receiving the balance sale amount of Rs.98,850/- & put the plaintiff in possession of the suit property?

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