The court reinforced that for specific performance, a party must demonstrate readiness and willingness to fulfill contractual obligations, supported by sufficient evidence.

JUDGMENT :

R.N.MANJULA, J.

These Second Appeals have been filed, challenging the judgment and decree made in A.S. Nos.9 to 11 of 2011 on the file of District Judge, District Court No.II, Kanchipuram confirming the judgment and decree dated 17.06.2011 made in O.S. Nos.199 of 1995, 169 of 2007 & 168 of 2007 on the file of Sub Court, Kanchipuram respectively.

2.The plaintiff in O.S. No.199 of 1995 is the plaintiff in O.S. No.168 of 2007 also. The defendant in both the suits, namely, O.S. Nos.199 of 1995 and 168 of 2007 is the plaintiff in O.S. No.169 of 2007. The suit in O.S. No.199 of 1995 has been filed for specific performance. The other suits have been filed for permanent injunction. In O.S. No.199 of 1995, the Trial Court has partly decreed the suit in granting the alternative relief of refund of the advance amount and has dismissed the suit in other respects. O.S. No.168 of 2007 was dismissed and O.S. No.169 of 2007 was decreed and the relief of permanent injunction was granted by the Trial Court. Aggrieved party in all the three suits has preferred three Appeal Suits in A.S. Nos.9 to 11 of 2011, which were also dismissed. However, the First Appellate Court, in A.S. No.9 of 2011, has slightly modified the decree by granting 9% interest on the refund of the advance amount. Challenging the same, the plaintiff in O.S. Nos.199 of 1995 & 168 of 2007 and defendant in O.S. No.169 of 2007 has filed these three Second Appeals. As the aggrieved party is one and the same in all these Second Appeals and the parties to the proceedings are also same in all these Second Appeals, a common judgment is delivered in all these Second Appeals.

3.The short facts pleaded by the plaintiff in O.S. No.199 of 1995 in his plaint are as follows:

a)The defendant approached the plaintiff for selling his landed properties for a sale consideration of Rs.1,00,000/-, for which the plaintiff has also agreed and amenable to the purchase of the same for the said consideration. In view of the sale agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, the agreement of sale has been executed on 04.08.1993 for a sale consideration of Rs.1,00,000/-. A sum of Rs.40,000/- has been paid to the defendant by the plaintiff as advance and time limit has been fixed as 30.12.1993. In the sale agreement, the defendant stood as first party and the plaintiff stood as second party. In the first page of the sale of agreement dated 04.08.1993, the time fixed for completion of the regular sale deed with due registration was wrongly typed as 30.12.1993 instead of 31.12.1993, which was correctly mentioned at second page of the said sale agreement;

b)Though the plaintiff was ready and willing to get the sale deed executed before 31.12.1993 by paying the sale consideration, the defendant has evaded to complete the transaction. Despite request made by the plaintiff through his representative by name Vijayaraghavan and his father S.G.Sohanraj and his Office Clerk by name T.Kannan, the defendant did not come forward to complete the sale transaction. The defendant was hospitalised on 27.12.1993 and 28.12.1993. The plaintiff approached the defendant with the balance sale consideration, but the defendant has received only Rs.1,000/- from the plaintiff for his hospital expenses by stating that he will complete the sale transaction before pongal, aft