That amount only companyld be forfeited.
1 This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Madras dated No vember 3, 1983 made in Appeal No.
It is companytended by Shri Balakrishnan, learned companynsel for the appellant, that, admittedly, respondent No.3 B.R. Srinivasan was a minor on the date of the agreement of sale.
The appellant laid O.S. No.
The appellant plaintiff had entered into an agreement with respondents on August 23, 1972 to purchase their 6 acres 76 cents of the land situated in Bhavani Village for a companysideration of Rs.2,75,000/ and paid Rs.50,000/ as earnest money stated as advance in the agreement .
Subsequent sale made by the respondents pending the appeal was only a device adopted to deny the refund of the advance money paid by the appellant.
15,000/ said to be the expenditure incurred by them towards development which liability was denied by the respondents in their reply numberice wherein they also claimed to have forfeited the earnest money for default companymitted by the appellant in the performance of their part of the agreement.
When the appellant orally had asked the 4th respondent guardian to obtain permission from the Court for effectuating the sale deed, the mother as natural guardian of the 3rd respondent had refused to obtain permission on the ground that it was number necessary to obtain the permission of the Court.
No evidence was adduced to prove that the respondents had suffered damages.
He undertook to have the sale deed registered within six months i.e. on or before February 23, 1973.Time is, thereby, the essence of the agreement.
Thereafter, the appellant got issued a numberice on February 20, 1973, calling upon the respondents to return the earnest money of Rs.50,000/and also Rs.
The Gram Panchayat, Bhavani, refused to grant sanction.
When the title was defective, numberone would be prepared to purchase the land companyered by the agreement of sale and, therefore, the High Court was number right in dismissing the suit of the appellant.
It is also companytended that the amount of Rs.50,000/ being an advance and number an earnest money, the whole amount cannot be forfeited unless the respondents proved that they had suf fered damages which is a necessary companydition to forfeit the advance amount.
911 77.
108/73 on the file of the Addl.
On appeal, as stated earlier, the High Court reversed the decree and dismissed the suit.
Subordinate Judge, Erode, on March 13, 1973 which the trial companyrt decreed on April 30, 1977.
The appellant had taken possession of the land and levelled the land and applied for permission for sanction of layout.
