Advocates:
D. MAHESH BABUD. BHARATHI REDDY

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4451 OF 2008

G. JAYASHREE & ORS.

… APPELLANTS

Versus

BHAGWANDAS S. PATEL & ORS. … RESPONDENTS

[WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4452 OF 2008]

J U D G M E N T

S.B. SINHA, J.

1.

Plaintiffs in a suit for grant of decree for specific performance of

contract are before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and

decree dated 13.11.2007 passed by a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh

High Court reversing a judgment and decree dated 25.10.1995 of the

Additional Subordinate Judge, Ranga Reddy district at Saroornagar,

Hyderabad in Original Suit No. 191 of 1987 dismissing the said suit.

2.

The basic facts of the matter are not in dispute.

Respondents No. 1 to 3 are owners of the land measuring 11 Acres

and 39 Gunthas in Survey No. 36 situated at village Satamrai of

Shamshabad Mandal in the district of Ranga Reddy. The said land abuts

National Highway No. 7 between Hyderabad and Bangalore. The said

respondents entered into an agreement for sale with Mohammed Kasim Ali

and G. Srinivas Reddy, whose heirs and legal representatives are the

appellants, for sale of the said property for a sum of Rs. 18,00,000/-, out of

which a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- was paid as earnest money.

Some of the important clauses contained in the said agreement for

sale read as under:

“1.

The total consideration being Rs. 18 lakhs,

the Vendees have paid a sum of

Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) to the

Vendor as the earnest money. The balance

sum of Rs.17 lakhs shall be paid within 6

months of release of tentative layout

HUDA.

2.

The sale shall take effect within 6 months

from the release of tentative layout from

B.U.D.A.

(Bhagyanagar

Urban

Development Authority).

3.

The actual physical possession of the

property shall remain with the Vendors

2

only. However, the Vendors hereby give

permission to the Vendees to go over the

property and divide the property into

different plots. The expenses for dividing

plots and leaving roads shall also be borne

by the Vendees. The Vendees are entitled at

their own expenses to obtain the layout

permission from Competent Authority. The

Vendees are also hereby permitted to use

the Telephone however they shall be liable

to pay Telephone bills.

xxx

xxx

xxx

5.

The above stipulated time for sale to take

effect may be extended by the Vendor. But

unless the stipulated time is extended in

writing by the Vendors, the Vendees shall

be liable to pay Bank interest (the interest at

which bank lands to its customers) to the

Vendors on the unpaid purchase money

after two months of stipulated time.

xxx

xxx

xxx

7.

The Vendors are owners of 11 acres 39

gunthas falling in S. No. 36. However, the

Vendors have fenced the property giving set

back from the Road. The Vendees shall be

entitled to obtain compensation for the

unfenced land from the concerned

Government authorities.

8.

As the Vendees are in the business of

selling plots, the Vendees shall be liable to

pay the sale consideration of each plot

proportionately on the same day to the

Vendors when the Vendors effect sale of

that particular plot.”

3

3.

Indisputably, besides the above agreement of sale, the said two

vendees had also entered into an Agreement of sale with one S. Yadagiri,

his sons and some others for sale of land measuring 90 Acres in Survey No.

643 to 658, which is adjacent to the land of the respondents.

4.

Pursuant to or in furtherance of the said agreements of sale, the said

vendees had applied for a joint layout for the entire land of 101.39 acres and

a sum of Rs.1,54,725/- was paid by the said vendees towards layout permit

fee and developmental charges vide undated receipt. The relevant portion

of the said receipt reads as under:

“It is not part of sale consideration, for any reason,

the amount is refunded, th