Specific performance can be denied in familial relationships, emphasizing the necessity for clean hands in litigation.

This is defendant’s appeal under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.) impugning the judgment dated 20.02.2013 of learned III Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal in O.S.No.2 of 2012. During the pendency of the appeal, the sole appellant died and her legal representatives were brought on record as appellant No.2 and appellant No.3. The sole respondent is the plaintiff in the suit.

2. Parties to the litigation are closely related. Father of the plaintiff is the elder brother of the defendant. The appellant- defendant owns the plaint schedule property. On 22.09.2010 the owner allegedly agreed to sell the plaint schedule property for a total sale consideration of Rs.20,00,000/- and at the time of the bargain she received Rs.15,00,000/- towards part of the sale consideration and agreed to get O.S.No.83 of 2005 resolved and then receive the balance sale consideration and register the regular registered sale deed. It is also allegedly agreed that if she could not get the suit resolved within six months from the date of agreement for sale, she would refund Rs.15,00,000/- that she had received along with 24% interest per annum. To this effect, an unregistered Ex.A.1-agreement for sale was entered into between the parties. It is this bargain that resulted in dispute between parties. Alleging that the deceased first appellant owner despite the civil suit being resolved and despite being demanded failed to receive the balance sale consideration and failed to register the regular sale deed, the purchaser filed O.S.No.2 of 2012 with a prayer for specific performance and he also made an alternative prayer for refund of advance sale consideration along with 24% interest per annum and for costs and such other reliefs.

3. The defendant filed a written statement and denied the execution of agreement for sale and denied about receiving of Rs.15,00,000/- towards advance sale consideration and stated that the alleged agreement for sale is a fabricated and manipulated document pressed into service for knocking away the property of her which is worth Rs.1,00,00,000/-. Written statement makes a reference to her reply notice dated 17.11.2011 concerning a debt transaction between the parties. Finally, she prayed for dismissal of the suit.

4. Learned III Additional District Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal framed the following issues for consideration:

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 22.09.2010? 2. Whether the agreement of sale dated 22.09.2010 is a forged document?

3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for refund of amount with interest?

4. To what relief the plaintiff is entitled?

5. At the trial, plaintiff testified as PW.1 and one of the attesting witnesses of Ex.A.1-agreement for sale testified as PW.2 and the scribe of the said document testified as PW.3 and Exs.A.1 to A.5 were marked. Defendant testified as DW.1 and two elders testified as DW.2 and DW.3. Her own son testified as DW.4 and Exs.B.1 to B.7 were marked.

6. After considering the material on record and after considering the arguments advanced on both sides, learned trial Court recorded that it found truth in the case of the plaintiff and that by the evidence of PWs.1 to 3, Ex.A.1-agreement for sale was proved and the fact that plaintiff paid and defendant received Rs.15,00,000/- towards advance sale consideration was proved. It disbelieved the defence of the defendant that amounts received by her were only towards a debt and that she did not receive Rs.15,00,000/- but she received only Rs.9,00,000/-. However, the learned trial Court stated that in view of the fact that the dispute is between relatives, the primary relief of specific performance could not be granted and accordingly, it refused to grant the relief of specific performance of the agreement for sale.

However, it ordered for refund of advance sale consideration of Rs.15,00,000/- and granted 24% interest per annum over the said amount from the date of agreeme