IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P. Dhanabal, J.
Shri. R.Ashwin - Plaintiff
Versus
Smt. Kavitha Ravanan - Defendant
CS No. 363 of 2020
Decided On : 26-02-2026
JUDGMENT :
P. Dhanabal, J.
This Civil Suit has been filed by the plaintiff for the reliefs of recovery of money to the tune of Rs.1,35,67,123/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum and for costs.
2. The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:-
2.1. The defendant’s husband, viz., Ravanan, who is running a real estate business, under the name and style of VOX Group of Companies, had approached the plaintiff and mentioned that the defendant is the absolute and exclusive owner of the lands in Survey Nos.50/2A-1B, 54/1A (Part), 54/1B (part), 56/2 (part) and 54/2, all together an extent of 42.5 cents in the above said S.F.Nos situated at Kovilambakkam Village, Sholinganallur Taluk, Kanchipuram District. Both the plaintiff and the defendant agreed and entered into an agreement in respect of the sale of properties for a sale consideration of Rs.10.5 Crores and the plaintiff transferred a sum of Rs.1 Crore to the defendant through RTGS on 30.06.2017 and on the same day, viz., on 30.06.2017, sale agreement was sent by the plaintiff for signature. When the plaintiff intended to have the original documents, the defendant’s husband insisted that if 60% of the sale consideration is paid, then, he would settle the money due to the Hero Fincorp and take out the original documents. The plaintiff also expressed his willingness to pay the said sum to the Hero Fincorp directly by him, but the defendant and her husband did not agreed for that. Thereafter, the defendant and her husband did not sign the sale agreement that was sent on 30.06.2017.
2.2. The plaintiff requested the defendant to refund the advance immediately and the defendant’s husband stated that the property is being developed by Sobha Developers and he is having entitlement in the plots developed by the Sobha Developers and ensured that two flats will be allotted to her in the Sobha Winchester, which belongs to his share and an E-mail was also sent by the office of the defendant’s husband on 26.09.2018, in this regard. Pursuant to the same, an allotment letter for Units A141 and B142 were issued. The plaintiff has been requesting the defendant and her husband to register the said two flats, which was promised by them, instead of returning the advance paid by the plaintiff to the defendant. The defendant and her husband have been postponing the same for various reasons. Therefore, the plaintiff, on 15.06.2020, addressed an E-mail to the defendant’s husband and also sent many WhatsApp messages, but no reply has been received from the defendant and her husband, therefore, the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of money.
3. The brief averments of the Written Statement are as follows:-
3.1. The defendant denied the averments made in the plaint. In fact, the defendant is the owner of the properties mentioned in the plaint and it was the plaintiff, who approached the defendant’s husband and expressed his willingness to purchase the property and thereafter, entered into an agreement dated 30.06.2017 with the defendant for sale consideration of Rs.10.50 Crores to purchase the property and the plaintiff miserably failed to act as per the agreement dated 30.06.2017. The sale agreement dated 30.06.2017 was executed between the plaintiff and the defendant with a clause mentioning that there is a liability on the property with Hero Fincorp and the plaintiff after accepting terms and conditions of the agreement had paid an advance amount of Rs.1 Crore to the defendant and promised to pay the balance sale consideration as per the agreement, but the plaintiff miserably failed to handover the signed agreement to the defendant and also failed to pay the balance sale consideration, which proves the malafide intention of the plaintiff since the very inception of the agreement of sale.
3.2. In the agreement itself, it was stated that the original documents will be handed over to the plaintiff on clearing the liabilities of Hero Fincorp and the defendant’s husband also informed about the mortgage t
A party can claim a refund of earnest money if the other party fails to provide a valid title, and time is not necessarily the essence of the contract.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the plaintiff to demonstrate readiness and willingness to perform an agreement of sale, and the court's discretion to consider ....
Where a sum is named in a contract as a liquidated amount payable by way of damages, only reasonable compensation can be awarded not exceeding amount so stated. Similarly, in cases where amount fixed....
A seller must prove ownership and clear title to enforce forfeiture of an earnest deposit, especially when multiple legal heirs dispute the transaction.
The court clarified the enforceability of sale agreements, the protection of subsequent purchasers under Section 19-b of the Specific Relief Act, and the refund of advance amounts.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.