IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 25.06.2025 CORAM:

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP Appeal Suit. No.406 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.12262 of 2024 Natarajan ... Plaintiff/Appellant Versus

1. Sathiyan

2. P.Selvam ... Defendants/Respondents Prayer:- First Appeal filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code r/w. Order XLI Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, to set aside the Judgment and decree dated 30.11.2023 made in O.S.No.186 of 2022 on the file of the learned III Additional District Judge, Puducherry.

For Appellant : Mr.R.Thiagarajan For Respondents : Served through paper publication

J U D G M E N T

This First Appeal has been filed to set aside the Judgment and decree passed by the learned III Additional District Judge, Puducherry, in O.S.No.186 of 2022, dated 30.11.2023.

2. The Appellant herein is the Plaintiff before the learned III Additional District Judge, Pondicherry. The Plaintiff entered into sale agreement with the first Defendant on 24.08.2017. The property was allotted to the first Defendant through the partition deed dated 28.04.2017 on which date, the sale price for the property was fixed at Rs.12,00,000/-. On the same day, the Plaintiff had paid Rs.10,00,000/- and it was registered as Doc.No.11422 of 2017 with the Sub Registrar, Oulgaret. The sale agreement was prepared on 13.02.2020 and signed by the first Defendant on 14.02.2020, in the presence of witnesses and notary. The terms and conditions were recorded and Rs.10,00,000/- was paid in cash on the same day by the Plaintiff at the premises of Bank of Baroda (formerly Vijaya Bank), Rajiv Gandhi Square, Puducherry. The receipt of the advance amount was mentioned in the sale agreement and was also recorded on the mobile phone as a visual record. The first Defendant, at the first instance should have produced the original title deed, encumbrance certificate, payment details, and all other relevant documents. The first Defendant had not taken any steps towards the performance of his obligations despite the repeated requests made by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff was always ready and willing to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.2,00,000/- to the first Defendant and the same was intimated to the first Defendant, who also assured the Plaintiff that he would execute the sale deed on appreciation of the above documents and also would measure the property. In the meanwhile, there was Covid -19 lock down. Therefore, the first Defendant agreed to perform the contract after the month of February, 2021 and the Plaintiff believed the words of the first Defendant and waited patiently. However, the first Defendant did not come forward to execute the sale deed. Therefore, the Plaintiff checked encumbrance regarding the schedule mentioned property with Puducherry Registration Department's Online Website on 12.02.2021. Only then, he came to know that the first Defendant purposely and intentionally entered into a sale agreement with the second Defendant on 01.09.2020. It was subsequent to the sale agreement with the Plaintiff, the first Defendant had entered into a sale agreement with second Defendant where the first Defendant suppressed existence of an earlier sale agreement entered into with the Plaintiff on 13.02.2020. The said sale agreement with the second Defendant is for an imaginary sale consideration value of Rs.50,00,000/-. The Plaintiff approached the Sub Registrar of Oulgaret on 04.03.2021, calling upon the first Defendant to hand over the documents, 30 years encumbrance certificate and revenue records to the Plaintiff within a week and in respect of the schedule mentioned property for oral acknowledgment of his legal rights over the property. It was further requested that the property be measured and sale deed executed in the name of the Plaintiff after receipt of the balance sale consideration of Rs.2,00,000/-. It was made clear that upon failure to perform the contract, the Plaintiff would be forced to file a suit for specific perform