When a vendor admits the execution of an agreement for sale and has accepted substantial payments beyond the contractually stipulated timelines without protest or reservation, the plaintiff-vendee is deemed to have performed their part, entitling them to specific performance rather than mere refund of the consideration.

JUDGMENT: (per Justice B.R.Madhusudhan Rao)

1. This Memorandum of Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) assailing the judgment and decree passed by the learned IV Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy in OS No.183 of 2005, dated 28.02.2009.

2.1. Appellant counsel submits that respondent No.3 is a formal party in the Appeal.

2.2. Suit against respondent No.3-defendant No.3 is dismissed for default on 14.11.2005 for non-payment of process.

3. Appellant is the plaintiff and respondents are the defendants. For the sake of convenience, respondent Nos.1 and 2 - defendant Nos.1 and 2 are herein after referred to as respondents-defendants.

4.1. The case of the appellant-plaintiff is that he has entered into Agreement of Sale with (1) Ravula Devamma (2) R.Sadanand (3) R.Krishna and R.Suresh Kumar (respondent No.1-defendant No.1) to purchase the land to an extent of Acs.3-21 gts., in Sy.Nos.31, 36, 67 and 68 part situated at Nagole Village, Uppal Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District with specific boundaries for a total sale consideration of Rs.50,23,125/- and entered into agreement on 28.11.1999. On the date of agreement, appellant-plaintiff paid an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- as advance and the balance amount has to be paid by way of three installments within 19 months from the date of agreement. First installment has to be paid within seven months from the date of agreement (28.11.1999) remaining two installments have to be paid for every six months. The payments are subject to availability of land on the ground and survey has to be conducted which is liable for exclusion in calculating 19 months period. As per the agreement dated 28.11.1999, appellant-plaintiff is authorised to demarcate the schedule property into residential plots for which the vendors agreed to deliver the peaceful possession of the property. Appellant-plaintiff has purchased neighbouring properties to an extent of Ac.12-00 guntas by way of agreements. Subsequently, the property was measured and the land available is Acs.03-14 gts., boundaries were fixed (suit schedule property). Memorandum of Understanding is executed between the parties on 07.08.2000 to that effect. In the month of December, 2000 when the appellant-plaintiff proceeded for development of the suit property into plots, the neighbouring owners raised objections and he informed the same to the respondents-defendants. Respondents-defendants sought time to resolve the disputes. Appellant-plaintiff spent huge amount for the purpose of development of the property i.e., leveling the land, laying of roads, and errection of electricity poles. Appellant-plaintiff has paid different amounts on different intervals till 28.08.2002 in favour of respondent No.1-defendant No.1 and his brother Krishna. Respondent No.1-defendant No.1 received the amounts after the death of his mother (R.Devamma) and brother (R.Krishna). Respondents-defendants developed evil thoughts and started evading the appellant-plaintiff. Respondent No.3-defendant No.3 executed registered GPA cum agreement of sale with possession of his 1/3rd undivided share in Sy.Nos.31, 36, 67 and 68 (part) in the name of nominee of the appellant-plaintiff on 02.06.2001.

4.2. In the last week of January, 2003 appellant-plaintiff approached the respondents-defendants with balance sale consideration of Rs.6,34,166/- after deducting an amount of Rs.25,48,334/- already paid and executed sale deeds in his favour in r