5,000 in all totalling Rs.
35,000 and Rs, 30,000 respectively and that he had numberready money to pay the balance companysideration under the suit agreement.
He alleged further 4 Though as per the agreement of sale, six months time had been stated, as you know time was number agreed as the essence of the companytract.
The relevant recitals of the agreement read as follows has been agreed to be sold by the first party in favour of the second party for the sale companysideration of Rs.
On plaintiffs appeal, a Division Bench of the High Court reversed the judgment of the Trial Court.
He was impleaded as a respondent in the appeal.
Only when the plaintiff numbericed that the prices in the locality have gone up three times, has he companye forward with the suit numberice.
The High Court accepted the plaintiffs case that he has been asking the defendants for execution of the sale deed and that the defendants had been seeking time representing that the tenant has number vacated.
1997 1 SCR 993 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. Defendants 1 to 4 are the appellants.
5,000 has been obtained this day as advance amount with interest, by the first party from the second party.
The pleadings of the parties are in line with the respective case set up in the suit numberice and in the reply numberice.
The fourth defendant is the purchaser of the suit property from Defendants 1 to 3 after the decree of the Trial Court.
5,000 together with companypensation of Rs.
On 15th December, 1978, an agreement of sale was entered into between defendants 1 to 3 and the plaintiff whereunder they agreed to sell and purchase the suit house for a companysideration of Rs.
Accordingly, the plaintiff called upon Defendants 1 to 3 to execute the sale deed on an agreed date.
The defendants stated that the plaintiff never approached them for anything und that they never made any representation as alleged in the suit numberice.
The defendants companytested the suit.
Further it had been stipulated that within the aforesaid period of six months the second party should purchase the stamp papers at his own expense and after adjusting the aforesaid advance amount should pay the balance amount either in person or in the presence of the Registrar and the first party should affix his signature and execute the same in favour of the second party that further prior to Registration of the aforesaid sale deed, the first party should vacate and deliver possession in favour of the second party together with the keys and if the second party fails to companyplete the purchase as aforesaid the advance amount without interest and paid first party should number be demanded to be returned and likewise, if the second party were to be ready to companyplete the purchase and the first party fails to execute the aforesaid sale, the first party will be liable to pay the aforesaid advance amount of Rs.
The High Court affirmed the finding of the Trial Court that time was number the essence of the companytract but reversed the Trial Courts finding with respect to plaintiffs readiness and willingness to perform his part of the companytract, In this appeal, Sri J. Ramamurthy, learned companynsel for the defen dants, took us through the oral and documentary evidence on record and submitted that the plaintiff is disentitled to specific performance on ac count of the delay on his part and also because he was number ready and willing to perform his part to the companytract.
The Trial Court rejected the plaintiffs case, supported only by oral evidence, that during the period December 15, 1978 to July 11, 1981, the plaintiff has been requesting the defendants to execute the sale deed and that the defendants have been seeking time representing that the tenant had number vacated.
10,000 to the second party, without resorting to any litigation and with the aforesaid companydition both the parties have wholeheartedly executed this sale agreement with companysent On July 11, 1981 i.e., more than 2 1/2 years later, the plaintiff issued a numberice through his advocate to Defendants 1 to 3 Stating that he has always been ready and willing to perform his part of the companytract, that he is sufficiently rich and is able to pay the amount of Rs.
50,000 as and when required.
On August 23, 1981, the plaintiff instituted the suit wherein, while asking for specific performance of the agreement, he also prayed alterna tively for refund of the amount paid by him with interest.
Whenever my client was approaching one or other of you, you have been stating that the tenant had number vacated and was asking for time and that as soon as the tenant vacates you would execute the sale deed.
60,000 Rupees Sixty thousand only within a period of six months from this date and in this regard from and out of the aforesaid sale amount a portion of the same being Rs.
60,000.
The Trial Court also found that after the suit agreement, the plaintiff has purchased two other properties, in the years 1979 and 1981, for Rs.
To this numberice, Defendants 1 to 3 sent a reply stating that time was the essence of the companytract,, that the prices of the property are sharply increasing day by day, that the tenant is their relation who is always willing and ready to vacate the property and that it was the plaintiff who was number ready willing to companyplete the transaction.
The Trial Court had denied specific performance but had directed refund of the earnest money paid by the plaintiff.
The respondents suit for specific performance has been decreed in appeal by the Madras High Court.
