The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of the plaintiff's willingness to perform the contract and the defendant's readiness to execute the sale deed in a suit for specific performance. The discretionary nature of Order XII Rule 6 of CPC and the requirement for clear, unambiguous admissions were also emphasized.

ORDER :

This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner/defendant assailing the orders dated 26.07.2019 in I.A.No.708 of 2018 in O.S.No.131 of 2016, on the file of the learned Judge, Family Court-cum-VII Additional District Judge, Sangareddy.

2. This application in I.A.No.708 of 2018 was filed by the defendant under Order XII Rule 6 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code (for short, CPC) to dismiss the main suit and also to grant exemplary costs under Section 35-A of C.P.C. on the ground that though defendant is always ready and willing to perform his part of contract, plaintiff was not ready and not willing to perform his part of contract, having given an undertaking to pay the balance sale consideration, failed to deposit the same. Thus, the suit of the plaintiff is liable to be dismissed by awarding exemplary costs.

3. Heard both sides. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter referred as plaintiff and defendant as arrayed in the original suit.

4. The plaintiff has filed the original suit for specific performance of suit agreement of sale dated 06.06.2016, wherein and where under, it is mentioned that the plaintiff has agreed to purchase the suit schedule property for a valid consideration of Rs.76,23,000/- and paid an advance amount of Rs.21,50,000/- agreeing to pay the balance sale consideration on or before 02.08.2016 and to get the sale deed executed in his favour. In that suit, the defendant has filed a written statement, issues are settled. As per the material available on record and as per the pleadings in the plaint and written statement, it is found that the plaintiff has agreed to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.54,73,000/- on or before 02.08.2016 and to get the registered sale deed executed, but the plaintiff has failed to deposit the balance sale consideration before the Court. Initially, the plaintiff has filed I.A.No.707/2017 to send the said agreement of sale to the Registration office for impounding with required stamp duty and penalty.

5. Earlier, the plaintiff having filed I.A.No.628 of 2017 to deposit the balance sale consideration before the Court, failed to deposit the said amount. The plaintiff has also filed I.A.No.653 of 2016 for grant of ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants for alienating the suit schedule property to the third parties. Later, when the plaintiff failed to show any interest, that application was closed. Thereafter, plaintiff has filed I.A.No.618 of 2017 to reopen I.A.No.653 of 2016 and to pass orders on merits. While I.A.No.618 of 2017 was pending, plaintiff filed another I.A.No.628 of 2017 to advance I.A.No.618 of 2017. During pendency of I.A.No.628 of 2017, plaintiff gave an oral undertaking to deposit the balance sale consideration on or before 07.09.2017, but he could not deposit the same. Later, I.A.No.628 of 2017 was dismissed as infructuous. I.A.No.618 of 2017 was also dismissed. Thereafter, the plaintiff has filed a memo on 25.04.2019 to permit him to deposit the balance sale consideration. The defendant has opposed the said memo dated 25.04.2019 and filed the present application in I.A.No.708 of 2018 under Order XII Rule 6 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. to dismiss the original suit in O.S.No.131 of 2016 with exemplary costs as the plaintiff has failed to deposit the balance sale consideration.

6. This application filed in I.A.No.708 of 2018 was dismissed by the Court below with an observation that if the defendant has expressed his intention to execute sale deed after receipt of balance sale consideration amount, while the plaintiff is not ready and willing to deposit the balance sale consideration, then only the dismissal of the suit would arise. The plaintiff has been expressing his intention to deposit the sale consideration amount, whereas the defendant did not file any memo to the effect that he is ready and willing to take balance sale consideration and to execute sale deed. Without such undertaking and without expression to e