Buyers have a statutory right to claim interest on purchase money until sale deed execution under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act.

ORDER :

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

1. This civil revision petition has been filed to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 23.01.2025 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2024 in O.S.No.102 of 2007 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge, Coimbatore.

2. The petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit and the second respondent in this revision is the subsequent purchaser/third defendant. The very issue involved in this revision is with regard to the refund of interest accrued on the balance sale consideration deposited from the date of deposit till the date of execution of sale deed.

3. Brief background in filing of this revision are as follows:

3.a. The first respondent/judgment debtor had entered into a sale agreement dated 01.08.2006 with the revision petitioner/plaintiff/decree holder to sell the suit property for a total sale consideration of Rs.1,54,18,000/- and received a sum of Rs.30 lakhs as advance. Since, the second respondent has not come forward to execute the sale deed as per the terms of the sale agreement, the revision petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.102 of 2007 on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions Court, Coimbatore seeking for specific performance. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner came to know that the first defendant had executed sale deed in favour of the second defendant/Simrija Sharath Chandrakumar, who in turn, had executed the sale deed in favour of the third defendant/James Paul. Hence, the defendants 2 and 3 were impleaded. The suit was decreed exparte vide decree and judgment dated 07.12.2012. The revision petitioner deposited the balance sale consideration of Rs.1,24,18,000/- to the account of III Additional District Court, Coimbatore.

3.b. Third defendant filed an application in IA.No.556 of 2013 to set aside the exparte decree dated 07.12.2012 and the same was allowed. Thereafter, after trial, the suit was decreed for specific performance vide decree and judgment dated 26.09.2016. Challenging the decree and judgment, the third defendant had filed an appeal before this Court in A.S.No.114 of 2017. This Court vide decree and judgment dated 30.12.2018 dismissed the appeal holding that the hasty manner in which the sale deed dated 14.12.2006 came to be executed by the first defendant in favour of the second defendant is nothing short of a deceitful and calculated design devised by the first defendant intended to deprive the right of the plaintiff as an agreement holder of the suit property.

3.c. SLP was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the third defendant in SLP.Nos.17194 & 17195 of 2019 which was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 29.07.2019 and the decree of the Trial Court has reached finality. The revision petitioner filed execution petition in EP.No.104 of 2019 for execution of the sale deed against the defendants 1 to 3. Pending execution petition, the second defendant died, therefore, application was filed in E.A.No.2 of 2019 to impleading the legal heir which was allowed vide order dated 03.03.2020. Challenging the said order, the third defendant filed revision in CRP.No.1815 of 2021, however, the said revision was also dismissed vide order dated 06.10.2021.

3.d. E.P.No.104 of 2019 was allowed vide order dated 25.04.2022. Challenging the said order, revision was filed in CRP.No.2004 of 2022 and the said revision was dismissed vide order dated 30.06.2022. On 11.07.2022, sale deed was executed in favour of the petitioner in the above execution petition as against 11.86 acres since, 0.50 acres was acquired by the Highways Department pending the suit and the third defendant received a compensation amount of Rs.18,60,527/-. The pet