JUDGMENT

This Second Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated December 16, 2002 passed in A.S. No.105 of 1999 by 'the II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai' ['First Appellate Court' for convenience], whereby the Judgment and Decree dated September 17, 1997 passed in O.S. No.6774 of 1996 by 'the VII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai' ['Trial Court' for convenience] was confirmed.

2.For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the Original Suit.

PLAINTIFFS' AVERMENTS NECESSARY FOR THE DISPOSAL OF THIS SECOND APPEAL AS IT UNFURLS FROM THE CASE FILE IN BRIEF

3.An extent of land measuring 6,029 ½ sq. ft. along with the superstructure thereon, bearing Old Door No. 28, New Door No. 36, Sabapathi Mudali Street, Perambur, Madras - 11, originally belonged to Arumuga Gramani. He had a son by name Subramania Gramani, who had two sons, namely S.Vinayagamurthy (Husband of Defendant No.11) and S.Rajamanickam (Defendant No.10). S.Vinayagamurthy and S.Rajamanickam became entitled to the aforesaid property by mode of succession. On November 29, 1973, said S.Vinayagamurthy and S.Rajamanickam together sold an extent of 1,073 sq. ft. thereof to one Saroja, and on June 26, 1977, they together sold an extent of 1,080 sq. ft. thereof to one John Devaraj. S.Vinayagamurthy passed away issueless on January 12, 1985, leaving behind his wife / eleventh defendant - Pushpa as his sole legal heir.

3.1.Thereafter, defendants 10 and 11 jointly executed a registered Sale Deed dated September 19, 1988, conveying the remaining extent of 4,049 sq. ft. in the aforesaid property in favour of the plaintiffs. The property conveyed to the plaintiffs is the suit property herein. Pursuant to the said sale transaction, possession of a major portion of the suit property was delivered to the plaintiffs. However, the remaining portion of the suit property continued to be under the occupation of the first defendant and her husband - Thiruvenkatachari. The plaintiffs took steps to obtain possession of the suit property. In response, first defendant and her husband relied upon three Sale Agreement dated June 1, 1980, December 31, 1980 and June 9, 1982 allegedly executed by S.Vinayagamurthy and S.Rajamanickam in their favour, to lay claim in respect of entire suit property.

3.2.Further case of the plaintiffs is that the first defendant and her husband - Thiruvenkatachari filed O.S. No.5500 of 1983 on the file of the V Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, seeking specific performance of the aforesaid three Sale Agreements. The suit property described herein was the subject matter of the said Suit. The said Suit was decreed Ex-parte on November 16, 1983.

3.3.As per the said Ex-parte Decree, a sum of Rs.35,724.40/- was required to be deposited by the vendees, the first defendant and her husband, towards the balance sale consideration, which they failed to do. The said Ex-parte Decree did not prescribe any time limit for such deposit, nor did the vendees take any steps to deposit the balance sale consideration or otherwise act upon the Decree till 1988. Hence, the present plaintiff obtained the aforesaid registered Sale Deed dated September 19, 1988 in respect of the suit property from tenth defendant - Rajamanickam and eleventh defendant - Pushpa.

3.4.The second defendant therein, who is the tenth defendant herein, namely Rajamanickam filed I.A. No.445 of 1991 in O.S. No.5500 of 1983 under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 seeking to rescind the aforesaid Ex-parte decree and the same was allowed after contest and pursuantly, a sum of Rs.25,185/- was deposited on November 11, 1991, by him. Thereafter, defendants 1 to 9 herein filed I.A. No.16760 of 1991 seeking review of the Order passed in I.A. No.445 of 1991, which was also dismissed on November 20, 1996. In the meantime, the Execution Petition filed by first defendant and her husband was also dismissed on August 3, 1992. Feeling aggrieved