1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.07.2009 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.TAMILVANAN C.S.No.265 of 2007 P.Ram Mohan .. Plaintiff vs V.Suresh .. Defendant Suit filed under Order VII Rule 1 CPC r/w Order IV Rule 1 of O.S.Rules for the relief as prayed here under. For Plaintiff : Mr.T.V.Krishnakumar For Defendant : No appearance J U D G M E N T The suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant, seeking a decree for specific performance of the contract. 2. As per the plaint averments, the plaintiff had entered into an agreement of sale with the defendant on 23.12.2006 in respect of purchasing the schedule mentioned property. The sale consideration was fixed at Rs.19,50,000/- and the time fixed for the compliance of the sale transaction was three months from the date of the agreement. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. As per the agreement, the defendant shall give vacant possession of the schedule mentioned property at the time of execution of the sale deed. A sum of Rs.2 lakhs was paid by the plaintiff as advance and part of the sale consideration and the said amount was paid towards the discharge of the housing loan obtained by the defendant. Subsequently, though the plaintiff was ready and willing to pay the balance of consideration, the defendant was not ready for executing the sale deed. Hence, the plaintiff caused legal notice dated 20.03.2007, however, there was no response from the defendant. Hence, the plaintiff has filed the suit seeking specific performance of the contract. 4. It is seen that the defendant was called absent and set exparte. On the side of the plaintiff, the power of attorney of the plaintiff was examined as P.W.1, apart from the proof affidavit filed by the said power of attorney. On the side of the plaintiff, Exs.P.1 to P.7 were marked. 5. Ex.P.1 is the general power of attorney deed executed by the plaintiff in favour of P.W.1. The original agreement, dated 23.12.2006 entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant was marked as Ex.P.2. As contended by the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff, the sale consideration fixed by the parties was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 at Rs.19,50,000/-, out of which, for discharge of the housing loan obtained from the State Bank of India, Chennai, the defendant had received a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-, for which there is an averment in the agreement for sale, Ex.P.2. Ex.P.3 is the xerox copy of the bank chalan for the payment of Rs.2,00,000/-. Ex.P.4 is the details furnished by the State Bank of India, Chennai branch relating to the term loan obtained by the defendant. Ex.P.5 is the letter from the State Bank of India, dated 09.03.2007 and the details of the term loan. As per this document, the State Bank of India, chennai branch has stated that the term loan sanctioned on the defendant based on the value of the property, and accordingly Term Loan of Rs.20,72,000/- was sanctioned. Ex.P.6 is the copy of the legal notice, dated 20.03.2007 issued by the counsel for the plaintiff to the defendant. Ex.P.7 is the postal receipt. Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff submits that the postal acknowledgment was not returned to the plaintiff. 6. In the absence of the appearance of the defendant and in the absence of the contra evidence on the side of the defendant, based on the oral and documentary evidence, I hold that the plaintiff has established his case for seeking a decree for specific performance of the contract. 7. Even as per the plaintiff's case, the balance payable as per the agreement for sale, after deducting https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 Rs.2,00,000/- is Rs.17,50,000/-. Hence, subject to the condition that the plaintiff should deposit the balance of sale consideration of Rs.17,50,000/- (Rupees seventeen lakhs and fifty thousand only) on or before 06.08.2009, the suit has to be decreed as prayed for with costs. 8. If the balance of sale consideration is not paid within the specified time limit, the plaintiff is entitled to get back only the advance amount of Rs.2,00,000/- paid by him with 18% interest p.a., and costs. Accordingly, the suit is decreed. Time granted for compliance for executing th e sale deed by the defendant, one month from 06.08.2009, on the deposit being made. Sd/.S.T.J 29.07.2009 //Certified to be a true copy// Dated this the day of 2015. R.s/13.08.2015 COURT OFFICER From 25.09.2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Order/Judgment Decree in this format. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/