Defendant did not perform either of the two obligations imposed on him - Defendant has been receiving monies from the plaintiff even after the expiry of the three months period Defendant's conduct delayed the performance of the agreement - Delay on the part of the plaintiff in issuing the legal notice alone will not disentitle him from obtaining the relief of specific performance.

Citation

2019-4-L.W. 751

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Reserved on: 05.09.2019 Delivered on : 18.09.2019 S.A.No.10 of 2014 R.Subramanian, J.

K.C.Rajabathar ..Appellant

VS.

B.Purushothaman.      ... Respondent

Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and Decree dated 04.07.2013 and made in A.S.No.1 of 2012 on the file II Additional District Court, Tindivanam reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 15.10.2009 and made in O.S.No.52 of 2006 on the file of Principal Subordinate Court, Tindivanam.

C.P.C., Order 41, rule 31, appellate court, points, non-framing of Specific relief Act, Section 16

Judgment of the lower appellate court is not vitiated by non framing of points for determination Plaintiff pleaded ingredients of readiness and willingness Defendant did not perform either of the two obligations imposed on him - Defendant has been receiving monies from the plaintiff even after the expiry of the three months period Defendant's conduct delayed the performance of the agreement

Plaintiff parted with almost 2/3rd of the sale consideration - Delay on the part of the plaintiff in issuing the legal notice alone will not disentitle him from obtaining the relief of specific performance

Para 33