Shamim Jahan vs Shambhu Prasad

3. The appellant herein filed a suit on the basis of an agreement to sell in respect of a plot of land praying for specific performance of the said agreement on the ground that the respondent- defendant had failed to perform his part of the contract. The consideration money which was fixed in terms of the said agreement was Rs. 1,17,000/- and on the date of entering into the said agreement an advance money of Rs. 15,000/- only was paid by the plaintiff-appellant to the defendant- respondent. There was a recital in the said agreement to the effect that since the plaintiff does not have enough money with her, an amount of Rs. 15,000/- is being paid by the appellant to the respondent as advance money, the balance sale consideration would be paid by 30th April, 1992, whereupon the defendant would execute the sale-deed and on his failure get the same executed through Court.

4. The plaintiff-appellant in the plaint has pleaded that she was always ready and willing to perform her part of the contract but the defendant failed to execute the sale-deed despite the issuance of a legal notice to him and, therefore, a decree should be passed in her favour granting a decree of specific performance of the agreement. The respondent-defendant contested the suit by filing a written statement. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, six issues were framed by the trial Court. The parties led their evidence and on completion and recording of the evidence, arguments were heard and the trial Court by its judgment and decree dated 04.09.1998 decreed the suit granting a decree of specific performance of the agreement.

5. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and decree, the respondent herein filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court which affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal.

6. Still being aggrieved, the respondent had filed an appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and by the aforesaid impugned judgment and decree both the judgments of the trial Court as also of the First Appellate Court were set aside by allowing the appeal. The High Court held the plaintiff - appellant entitled to recover Rs. 30,000/-, i.e., double the amount of advance money paid by her (Rs. 15,000/- towards principal amount and Rs. 15,000/- towards interest) which the defendant-respondent was directed to pay within a period of four months.

13.As stated hereinabove, notice came to be issued by the appellant only after expiry of about 2 years and 4 months of the date stipulated in the agreement for making payment of the amount. There is no correspondence between the parties placed on record to indicate that the parties were seeking for extension of time or otherwise and, therefore, it cannot be said that the appellant has been able to prove and establish her readiness and willingness to perform her part of the contract. The findings arrived at by the High Court, therefore, cannot be said to be in any manner illegal.

14.Having held thus, we are of the considered opinion that the judgment and decree passed by the High Court does not suffer from any infirmity. No other issue either arises for our consideration or is being urged by the learned counsel for the parties.

15.The appeal therefore has no merit and is dismissed.