The plaintiff's failure to prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract precludes specific performance, but the first defendant must return the advance amount with interest.

JUDGMENT :

PRAYER: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated June 20, 2018 passed in A.S.No.34 of 2017 on the file of Additional District Court (Fast Track Court), Arni, whereby the Judgment and Decree dated August 10, 2012 passed in O.S.No.92 of 2008 on the file of Subordinate Court, Arni, Tiruvannamalai District was reversed.

This Second Appeal is directed by the unsuccessful plaintiff before the First Appellate Court, assailing the Judgment and Decree dated June 20, 2018 passed in A.S.No. 34 of 2017 on the file of ‘Additional District Court (Fast Track Court), Arni’ ['First Appellate Court' for short], whereby the Judgment and Decree dated August 10, 2012 passed in O.S.No. 92 of 2008 on the file of ‘Subordinate Court, Arni, Tiruvannamalai District’ ['Trial Court' for short] was reversed.

2. Hereinafter, for the sake of convenience, the parties will be denoted as per their array in the Original Suit.

Plaintiff’s Case in Brief:

3. In the Plaint it is averred that the first defendant entered into a Sale Agreement on January 17, 2007 with the plaintiff, agreeing to sell his lands measuring roughly 2 Acres in Survey Nos.135/6 and 144/8 at the rate of Rs.1500/- per Cent and accordingly received an advance of Rs.25,000/- as part payment of the total sale consideration. The plaintiff blindly believed the first defendant as to the extent of the said lands. The period of performance was agreed to be within 60 days from the date of Sale Agreement.

3.1. Further averred that, later when the plaintiff approached the first defendant expressing his readiness and willingness to pay the remaining sale consideration and called upon him to present the Revenue Records pertaining to the said lands, the first defendant refused to do so. However, the plaintiff got the Revenue Records through some other mode and to his surprise, he learnt that the said lands measure only 1 Acre 36 Cents. Then, the plaintiff along with one Sampath and one Rajendran, approached the first defendant on February 21, 2007 expressing his readiness and willingness to pay the remaining sale consideration for the extent of 1 Acre 36 Cents alone instead of 2 Acres at the agreed rate of Rs.1500/- per Cent. The first defendant responded evasively.

3.2. Though the plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part of the Sale Agreement and approached the first defendant multiple times, the first defendant always refused. The first defendant was planning to sell the said lands to third parties. Hence, the Suit for specific performance of the Sale Agreement, and permanent injunction restraining the first defendant from alienating the Suit Property in favour of third parties as well as restraining the second defendant from registering the Suit Property in favour of anyone else. Also for the alternative relief of refund of advance amount.

First Defendant’s Case in Brief:

4. The first defendant filed Written Statement, wherein it is averred that Item No.2 of the Suit Properties was purchased vide Sale Deed dated December 14, 1979 out of sale proceeds of ancestral property. Item No.1 was purchased through Sale Deed dated March 14, 1990 out of joint family funds. Hence, the Suit Properties are joint family properties of the plaintiff, his two sons and two daughters.

4.1. It is further averred that he never executed any such Sale Agreement voluntarily out of free consent. The plaintiff, a realtor, brought the first defendant to thatched shed of one Chandrasekaran, the first defendant’s neighbouring land owner, on a false pretext that surveyor has come to survey the neighbouring lands. Then the plaintiff demanded the first defendant to sell the Suit Properties to him, and the first defendant refused. Then plaintiff offered the first defendant a spiked drink which rendered him incapable of comprehension and forcibly obtained his signature in a white paper whose contents were unknown to him, and thrusted h