IMPORTANT POINT
The court reaffirmed that specific performance is discretionary and requires clear evidence of a party's readiness and willingness to fulfill contractual obligations.

JUDGMENT:

(M.G. Priyadarsini, J.) :

Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 06.02.2023 in O.S.No.522 of 2022 (hereinafter will be referred as ‘impugned judgment’) passed by the learned II Additional District Judge, Medchal – Malkajgiri at Medchal (hereinafter will be referred as ‘trial Court’), the plaintiff No.2 preferred the present appeal to set aside the impugned judgment.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter are referred to as they are arrayed before the trial Court.

3. The brief facts of the case, which necessitated the appellant to file the present appeal is that, the plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 filed suit for specific performance in respect of suit schedule property against the defendant Nos.1 and 2. The averments of the plaint in brief are as under:

a) The Defendant Nos.1 and 2 are the absolute owners and peaceful possessors of Land Total admeasuring Acres 20.1/2 Guntas in Survey Nos. 149/A1, 149/A2, 149/8, 151/A1, 151/?2, 152/A3 and 152/A4, situated at Athvelli Village, Medchal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District by virtue of registered sale deed Document No's. 3883/86, 3733/86, 3884/86, 3670/86, 3676/86, 3732/86, 5373/90, registered in the office of Sub-Registrar, Medchal, R. R. Dist and Revenue Patta Pass Book No's 258 and 310.

b) The Defendants due to personal necessities of money offered to sell the land admeasuring Acres 17.18 Guntas i.e., suit schedule property out of land admeasuring Acres 20.1/2 Guntas in Survey Nos. 149/A1, 149/?2, 149/B, 151/A1, 151/A2, 152/A3 and 152/A4, situated at Athvelli Village, Medchal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District to the plaintiffs for total sale consideration of an amount of Rs.35,00,000/- and the plaintiffs agreed to purchase the same.

c) In pursuance of the above said offer, the plaintiffs paid an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- towards advance sale consideration to the defendants on 01.12.1998 and entered into an Agreement of Sale, and it was mutually agreed to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.33,00,000/- and shall get execute registered sale deed. As per the demand and request of the defendants, the plaintiffs paid Rs.26,00,000/- including the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- paid at the time of entering into agreement of sale on 01.12.1998 i.e., Rs.2,00,000/-on 29.10.2001, Rs.2,00,000/-

on 24.10.2004, Rs.3,00,000/- on 22.10.2007, Rs.2,00,000/- on 15.10.2010, Rs.7,00,000/- on 04.10.2013, Rs.4,00,000/-on 27.09.2016 and Rs.4,00,000/-on 25.01.2017 and the defendants received and passed separate receipts.

d) On 10.04.2019 the plaintiffs went to the defendants’ residence at Secunderabad and requested them to register the sale deed by receiving the remaining amount of Rs.9,00,000/- and deliver the possession of the suit schedule property in pursuance of Agreement of Sale dated 01.12.1998 to the plaintiffs, but the Defendants completely changed their attitude and said that they will not register for which the plaintiffs explained that they paid huge amount for purchasing the suit schedule property. On that the defendants threatened the plaintiffs with dire consequences and that the defendants and their family are the highly influential persons and alienate the suit schedule property to other intending purchasers at higher prices. Hence this suit.

4. Despite service of summons, defendant Nos.1 and 2 did not choose to contest the case, as such, they were set exparte on 04.07.2019.

5. On behalf of plaintiffs, the first plaintiff was examined as PW1 and got marked Exs.A1 to A21, which are agreement of sale, receipts, encumbrance certificates and sale deeds. The trial Court, on appreciating the evidence on record, has dismissed the suit by holding that the plaintiffs failed to show their readiness and willingness to perform their part of contract and that the plaintiffs failed to prove their case.

6. Aggrieved by the above said judgment and decree, the plaintiff No.1 preferred the present appeal.

7. Heard both sides and perused the record including the grounds of appeal.

8. The learned cou