Smt. R.Shanthi Sree

1

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA.

 soIN THE COURT OF THE III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR

DIVISION): AT VIJAYAWADA.

Present: Sri R. SHANTHI SREE, III Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Vijayawada. Wednesday, this the 12th day of March, 2025

OS No. 229/2019

Between: Smt. Parla Padma, W/o.Subramanyam, Age 44 years, Properties, R/o.D.No. 48­11­8­20/1, Currency Nagar, Main Road, Vijayawada, Krishna District.

.. Plaintiff

AND

1. Pothunedi Papayamma @ Jaya Sri, W/o. Nageswara Rao, Age 64 years, R/o.D.No. 6­72, Karturu Road, Gandigunta Village, Municipality,Krishna District.

2. Sarada Builders Rep by its Proprietor, Motepalli Naga Venkata Ramana, S/o. Subash Chandra Bose, Age 46 years, House No. 47, Municipal Employees Colony, Vijayawada Municipal Corporation Area, Krishna District.

3. Vegendla Siva Shankara Rao, S/o. Koteswara Rao, Age 66 years, R/0.D.No. 39­1­86, 1st Floor, Garapati Complex, Paidaiah Street, Labbipet, Vijayawada­520010.

.. Defendants

This suit is coming on for final hearing before me on 11.03.2025 in the presence of Sri D.V.Prasad, Advocate for plaintiff Ch.Markondaiah and Smt. M.Venkateswara Rao, Advocate for defendant No.2 and defendant No.1 and 3 are set ex­parte and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following: 

JUDGMENT

1.The suit is filed by the plaintiff for specific performance directing the defendants to execute a register regular sale deed in favour of plaintiff on his nominee in respect of plaint schedule within time fixed by the Hon’ble court on duly stamped papers supplied by the plaintiff and in case of defendants failing the same to execute the afore mentioned 2

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. sale deed as directed by the Hon’ble court on behalf of plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property at the costs of plaintiff and put the plaintiff in possession of the plaint schedule property or in alternative to direct the 2nd defendant to repay the advance sale consideration of Rs. 14,73,000/­ along with interest @18% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till date of realization with costs. 

2. The averments of plaint in brief are as follows:

The plaintiff and defendants are resident of Vijayawada, the 1st defendant by name Papayamma @ Jaya Sree is absolute owner of the house schedule property of 486.54 Sq.yards of site in RS No. 225 of

Penamaluru Village and Mandal, Krishna District within SRO,

Kankinapdu. The plaintiff submits that subsequently the defendants 2 and 3 entered into development cum and same was registered vide document No. 2411/2015 before SRO, Kankipadu. As per the terms development agreement cum GPA the defendants got some flats in Sri

Sai resident and flat No. SF2 in the 2nd floor which is item No.1 and 2 of the property came to their share. The plaintiff further submits that the defendant offered to sell the plaint schedule property 1 and 2 schedule properties to the plaintiff and plaintiff agreed to purchase the said plaint item No.1 and 2 schedule properties and bargaining is fixed for

Bilmaktha price of Rs. 20,00,000/­ and on 29.12.2015, the 2nd defendant has received an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/­ from the plaintiff towards advance sale consideration by way of cash and executed non possessory agreement of sale in favour of plaintiff on same day on 29.12.2015 as per terms of agreement of sale the plaintiff has to pay balance sale consideration of Rs. 15,00,000/­ within 60 days from the date of agreement on 29.12.2015 and get registered item No.1 and 2 3

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. schedule property in favour of the plaintiff with the expenses of plaintiff with interest clause in the said agreement of sale. Meanwhile the 2nd defendant requested the plaintiff for part payment of balance sale consideration, as per the request of the 2nd defendant the plaintiff paid an amount of Rs. 1,85,000/­ on 20.12.2016 by way of cheque and again

Rs. 2,50,000/­ on 21.12.2016 by way of cheque and again Rs.

22,5000/­ 21.12.2016 by way of cash and Rs. 26,000/­ on 24.12.2016 out of Rs. Rs. 16,000/­ through cheque and remaining was paid through cash of Rs. 65,000/­ on 22.06.2016 by way of cheque and Rs.

32,000/­ on 26.12.2016 by way of cheque and Rs. 1,00,000/­ on 07.01.2017 by way of cash. Rs. 1,00,000/­ on 10.01.2017 by way of cheque and Rs. 1,20,000/­ on 21.02.2017 by way of cash and Rs.

65,000/­ on 02.03.2017 by way of cash to the 2nd defendant and these part payment acknowledge by the 1st defendant in total. The plaintiff paid an amount of Rs. 14,73,000/­ towards part of sale consideration.

The plaintiff further submits that even prior to the due date, the plaintiff ready willing to perform of her contact from the beginning and asked 2nd defendant to perform his part of contract, to receive the balance sale consideration and registered the notice schedule property in her name.

The 2nd defendant used to postponed to perform his part of contract on some pretext or other.

3.The plaintiff is ready with the balance consideration willing to perform her part of contract and requested the 2nd defendant to come forward to registration. The plaintiff waited patiently till date performance his part of contract. But the 2nd defendant is not coming forward to registered the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff by receiving the balance sale consideration thereby harassing the plaintiff. The 4

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. plaintiff submits that the 2nd defendant is liable to complete venture from the registration of the development agreement cum GPA vide registered document No. 2574/2475, dt. 11.05.2015 in the Joint Sub Registrar’s office, Kankipadu and it was clearly and categorically parties agreeing written understanding and agreed that the site owner/ 1st defendant for take six finished plots and 2nd defendant the builder of Sarada builders property, Motupalli Naga Venka Ramana, S/o. Motupalli Subhas

Chandra Bose take remaining 9 plots builders of Sharada builders and house site owner, both that the said venture will be completed 15 months time, if any delay occurred in the construction work for any reason another three months grace time will be given from the date of registration of development cum GPA registered agreement dt.

11.05.2015 for 18 months time ended in 11.05.2015 to 25.07.2017, if any delay will occurred to comply the ventures exceeds months that the builder will pay late fee charges interest @ 18% per annum on the agreement amount I.e, Rs. 20,00,000/­ only upto handed over the plot to the plot purchaser or house site owner. The plaintiff further submitted that as the plaintiff vexed with the attitude of the defendant the plaintiff got issue legal notice on 15.12.2017 to perform contract and inform the execution register sale deed immediately from the date of receipt of notice. The defendants and 2 did choose and got it registered and the 3rd defendant receive notice and defendants 1 and 2 did not come forward . The plaintiff constrained to file the present suit for the relief of specific performance of contract before the Hon’ble court for specific performance of agreement of sale dt. 29.12.2015. Hence this suit.

5

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA.

4.As both defendants 1 and 3 have not filed written statements and they were set ex­parte and they have not chosen to defend their case.

5. The averments in written statement of 2 nd defendant in brief are as follows:

 The defendants denied all the contents of the plaint and further contended that the plaintiff’s husband Subramanyam is money lender and financier carrying on business at Currency Nagar, Vijayawada and got acquaintance through mediators and informed that for any financial needs the said Subramanyam will lend money for construction of plots accordingly the 2nd defendant borrowed an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/­ and in order to security for the 2nd defendant hand over the original agreement to him long back and also after payment of entire amount with agreed interest and asked him to return of the above said agreement, he promised that the agreement was tarred and he did not file case against him and also thereafter some time these defendants approached the plaintiff’s husband and demanded to said agreement.

Due to that the plaintiff’s husband bore gurge against these defendants and filed a frivolous suits against them by his wife and in his name in

OS No. 13/2020 on the file of V Addl.Junior Civil Judge’s court,

Vijayawada and they further submitted the alleged agreement voidable agreement and not enforceable against them and they never agreed to sell the schedule property to the plaintiff and they never seen the face of the plaintiff and the alleged payments made by the plaintiff in the plaint are false one and they never acknowledgments made by them on the plaint as alleged by the plaintiff and also reserved their right for contesting the matter and prayed the court to dismiss the suit.

6

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA.

6.On perusal of the plaint coupled with written statement the following issues are settled for trial:

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for specific performance as prayed for?

2. To what relief?

7. During the course of trial the plaintiff herself examined as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 and one more witness examined as PW2 and he is the husband of the plaintiff and defendant No.2 examined as DW1 and no documents were marked on his behalf.

8.Heard both sides.

9. Issue No.1:

The case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff and defendants are resident of Vijayawada, the 1st defendant by name Papayamma @ Jaya

Sree is absolute owner of the house schedule property of 486.54

Sq.yards of site in RS No. 225 of Penamaluru Village and Mandal,

Krishna District within SRO, Kankipadu. The plaintiff submits that subsequently the defendants 2 and 3 entered into development cum and same was registered vide document No. 2411/2015 before SRO,

Kankipadu. As per the terms development agreement cum GPA the defendants got some flats in Sri Sai resident and flat No. SF2 in the 2nd floor which is item No.1 and 2 of the property came to their share. The plaintiff further submits that the defendant offered to sell the plaint schedule property 1 and 2 schedule properties to the plaintiff and plaintiff agreed to purchase the said plaint item No.1 and 2 schedule properties and bargaining is fixed for Bilmaktha price of Rs. 20,00,000/­ and on 29.12.2015, the 2nd defendant has received an amount of Rs.

5,00,000/­ from the plaintiff towards advance sale consideration by way of cash and executed non possessory agreement of sale in favour of 7

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. plaintiff on same day on 29.12.2015 as per terms of agreement of sale the plaintiff has to pay balance sale consideration of Rs. 15,00,000/­ within 60 days from the date of agreement on 29.12.2015 and get registered item No.1 and 2 schedule property in favour of the plaintiff with the expenses of plaintiff with interest clause in the said agreement of sale. Meanwhile the 2nd defendant requested the plaintiff for part payment of balance sale consideration, as per the request of the 2nd defendant the plaintiff paid an amount of Rs. 1,85, 000/­ on 20.12.2016 by way of cheque and again Rs. 2,50,000/­ on 21.12.2016 by way of cheque and again Rs. 22,5000/­ 21.12.2016 by way of cash and

Rs. 26,000/­ on 24.12.2016 out of Rs. Rs. 16,000/­ through cheque and remaining was paid through cash of Rs. 65,000/­ on 22.06.2016 by way of cheque and Rs. 32,000/­ on 26.12.2016 by way of cheque and Rs. 1,00,000/­ on 07.01.2017 by way of cash. Rs. 1,00,000/­ on 10.01.2017 by way of cheque and Rs. 1,20,000/­ on 21.02.2017 by way of cash and Rs. 65,000/­ on 02.03.2017 by way of cash to the 2nd defendant and these part payment acknowledge by the 1st defendant in total. The plaintiff paid an amount of Rs. 14,73,000/­ towards part of sale consideration. The plaintiff further submits that even prior to the due date, the plaintiff ready willing to perform of her contact from the beginning and asked 2nd defendant to perform his part of contract, to receive the balance sale consideration and registered the notice schedule property in her name. The 2nd defendant used to postponed to perform his part of contract on some pretext or other.

10.The plaintiff further submitted that she is ready with the balance consideration willing to perform her part of contract and requested the 2nd defendant to come forward to registration. The plaintiff waited 8

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. patiently till date performance his part of contract. But the 2nd defendant is not coming forward to registered the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff by receiving the balance sale consideration thereby harassing the plaintiff. The plaintiff submits that the 2nd defendant is liable to complete venture from the registration of the development agreement cum GPA vide registered document No. 2574/2475, dt.

11.05.2015 in the Joint Sub Registrar’s office, Kankipadu and it was clearly and categorically parties agreeing written understanding and agreed that the site owner/ 1st defendant for take six finished plots and 2nd defendant the builder of Sarada builders property, Motupalli Naga

Venka Ramana, S/o. Motupalli Subhas Chandra Bose take remaining 9 plots builders of Sharada builders and house site owner, both that the said venture will be completed 15 months time, if any delay occurred in the construction work for any reason another three months grace time will be given from the date of registration of development cum GPA registered agreement dt. 11.05.2015 for 18 months time ended in 11.05.2015 to 25.07.2017, if any delay will occurred to comply the ventures exceeds months that the builder will pay late fee charges interest @ 18% per annum on the agreement amount I.e,

Rs. 20,00,000/­ only upto handed over the plot to the plot purchaser or house site owner. The plaintiff is vexed with the attitude of the defendant for which he got issued a legal notice dt. 15.11.2019 to perform his part of contract and inform the date of execution of registered sale deed immediately the date of receipt of notice and defendants 1 and 2 did not choose to receive the said notice and got it returned, the 3rd defendant received the said notice, the defendants 1 to 9

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. 3 did not give any reply for the relief of specific performance of contract and hence this suit was filed.

11.1st and 3rd defendant have not filed any written statements and only 2nd defendant filed written statement. The case of the 2nd defendant is that he denied all the contents of plaint and further contended that the plaintiff’s husband is a money lender and financer carrying on business at Currency Nagar, Vijayawada and got acquaintance through mediators and informed that any financial needs the said Subramanyma to lend money for construction of flats and accordingly the 2nd defendant borrowed an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/­ for security for lent money. The 2nd defendant handed over original agreement to him long back and also after payment of entire amount with agreed interest, the plaintiff’s husband has not return the original agreement and when the 2nd defendant asked for return of the above said agreement, the husband of the plaintiff promised to return back the agreement on placing out the same, for which the 2nd defendant has not filed any case against him and later on demanding the plaintiff’s husband he bold gurgdge defendants and file false and fvouriosu case through his wife in OS No. 13/2023 on the file of V Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada and the alleged agreement is voidable agreement and not enforceable them and they never agreed to sell him schedule property to the plaintiff and never saw the face of the plaintiff. The alleged payment made by the plaintiff mentioned in the plaint is false and they never acknoweldged the same and prayed the court to dismiss the suit.

12.On perusal of the case of the plaintiff and defendants, to prove the case of the plaintiff, the plaintiff got examined himself as PW1 and got marked Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 which are Ex.A1/Sale deed dated 29.12.2015, 10

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. Ex.A2/Office copy of legal notice dated 15.11.2019, Ex.A3/Postal receipts three in number and Ex.A4/Postal returned cover and the contentions of the PW1 is that she is the plaintiff in the suit and the 1st defendant is the house site owner and 2nd and 3rd defendants are builders. 2nd and 3rd defendants are entered into agreement to the 1st defendant to development house site into apartment, 2nd and 3rd defendants are approached her for finance to develop house site as apartment flats,. They entered into development agreement cum GPA on 11.05.2015 and same was registered with document No. 2411/2015

before SRO, Kankipadu. The defendants got some Sai Residency as

their share and flat No. SF­2 on the 2nd floor item No.1 and 2 of the schedule properties and one of the properties came to their share.

Subsequently the 2nd defendant offered to sell the plaint item No.1 and 2 of the schedule properties to the plaintiff. On bargaining it was fixed for a Bilmaktha price of Rs. 20,00,000/­ and on 29.12.2015, the 2nd defendant has received an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/­ from the plaintiff towards advance sale consideration by way of cash and executed a non possessory agreement of sale in favour of the plaintiff on 29.12.2015.

13.As per the terms of agreement of sale the plaintiff has paid balance sale consideration of RS. 15,00,000/­ within 60 days from the date of agreement I.e, 29.12.2015 to get registered the plaint item No.1 and 2 of the schedule properties in favour of the plaintiff with the expenses of the plaintiff there is interest clause in the said agreement of sale. Meanwhile the 2nd defendant requested the plaintiff for part payment of balance sale consideration, as per the 2nd defendant the plaintiff paid amount of an amount of Rs. 1,85, 000/­ on 20.12.2016 by way of cheque and again

Rs. 2,50,000/­ on 21.12.2016 by way of cheque and again Rs.

11

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. 22,5000/­ 21.12.2016 by way of cash and Rs. 26,000/­ on 24.12.2016 out of Rs. Rs. 16,000/­ through cheque and remaining was paid through cash of Rs. 65,000/­ on 22.06.2016 by way of cheque and

Rs. 32,000/­ on 26.12.2016 by way of cheque and Rs. 1,00,000/­ on 07.01.2017 by way of cash. Rs. 1,00,000/­ on 10.01.2017 by way of cheque and Rs. 1,20,000/­ on 21.02.2017 by way of cash and Rs.

65,000/­ on 02.03.2017 by way of cash to the 2nd defendant and these part payment acknowledge by the 1st defendant in total. by way of cash to the 2nd defendant and said payments were acknowledged by the 1st defendant and total plaintiff paid is Rs. 14,73,000/­, the plaintiff is ready and willing perform his part of contract and asked the 2nd defendant to perform his part of contract. The 2nd defendant used to postponed his part of contract some pretext or the other. The plaintiff is ready with the balance sale consideration but the 2nd defendant is not willing to take the balance sale consideration to perform his part of contract.

14.The plaintiff vexed with the attitude of the defendants send a legal notice to perform his part of contract to inform the execution of registered sale deed immediately from the date of receipt of notice, the defendants 1 to 3 have not chosen to perform their part of contract or given any reply to the notice issued by him, for which he filed the present suit.

15.To support his contentions of the plaintiff, the plaintiff got examined one more witness on his behalf as PW2 who is

P. Subramanyam, who is the husband of the plaintiff, he stated in his evidence that he is doing finance business and 2nd defendant is a builder.

The 2nd and 3rd defendants entered into unpossessory agreement of sale 12

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. with his wife Smt. Padma on 29.12.2015 for Rs.20,00,000/­. He has finance the 2nd defendant on different dates on 20.12.2016 for

Rs. 1,85,000/­, on 21.12.2016 for Rs. 22,500/­, on 21.12.2016 for

Rs. 2,05,000/­, on 24.12.2016 for Rs. 26,000/­, on 26.12.2016 for

Rs. 32,000/­ and on 26.12.2016 for Rs. 65,000/­. The 2nd defendant and builder obtained loan for Rs. 5,32,500/­ from the plaintiff and him on 29.12.2015, the 2nd defendant executed registered unpossessory sale agreement to the plaintiff for Rs. 20,00,000/­ in favour of the plaintiff and 2nd defendant constructed slab only to five floors and stopped the construction work for last seven years onwards due to finance trouble and he did not complete the venture and not registered the ventures in favour of the plaintiff. Hence the plaintiff filed the suit under specific performance and prayed the court to register the flat in favour of the plaintiff.

16. To support the contentions of the defendant, 2nd defendant himself examined as DW1 and he stated in his evidence that, 2nd defendant in the present case and MD of Sharadha Builders. And he further denied all the contentions of the plaintiff and stated that the allegations in the suit that the plaintiff paid Rs. 5,00,000/­ under Ex.A1 on 29.12.2015 and paid Rs. 1,85,000/­ on 20.12.2016 and Rs. 2,05,000/­ on 21.12.2016 and Rs. 26,000/­ on 22.12.2016, on 07.01.2017 and Rs. 1,00,000/­ and Rs. 1,00,000/­ on 27.02.2017 and agreeing to execution Ex.A1 to sell the plaint schedule property are not true. He further stated that

PW2 never financed Rs. 1,85,000/­ or Rs. 2,05,000/­ and Rs. 20,000/­,

Rs. 65,000/­, Rs. 26,000/­, Rs. 32,000/­ in total Rs. 5,32,000/­ as stated in PW2’s evidence. He further stated that PW2 filed OS No.

13/2020 in Hon’ble III Addl. Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Vijayawada at 13

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. the time of borrowing he obtained empty of Ex.A1. Due to disputes arosed between him and PW2, PW2 manipulated Ex.A1 in favour of PW1, he does not know the PW1 and he has no title in respect of plaint schedule property, PW1 is not entitled for specific performance and prayed the court to dismiss the suit.

16.Now coming to the cross examination of DW1, DW1 stated in his cross examination that Sharada Builders was started in the year 2002 and he is a proprietor of Sharada Builder and he has taken site at

Penamaluru Panchayat, the site owners are Pothineedu and Papayamma, the extent of site is 486 Sq.yards. He do not know the regarding the agreement Ex.A1 dt. 29.12.2015. He do not know whether passing of consideration of Rs. 20,00,000/­ under Ex.A1. He further stated that construction work still pending. He can not say how much work is pending.

17. On perusal of evidence placed by plaintiff and defendants, the main contention of the plaintiff is that 1st defendant is the owner of the house site and 2nd and 3rd defendants are builders and 2nd and 3rd defendants entered an agreement with the 1st defendant to develop the house sites into apartments, 2nd and 3rd defendants approached her for finance to develop the house site as apartment flats and they entered into development agreement cum GPA on 11.05.2015 and same was registered vide document No. 2411/2015 at SRO, Kankipadu. The defendants got some Sai Residency as their share and flat numbers SF­2 on the 2nd floor which is clearly mentioned in the schedule and one of the property came to their share and further case of the plaintiff is that subsequently the 2nd defendant offered the sell plaint Item No.1 and 2 schedule properties to the plaintiff and bargained and fixed for 14

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. Bilmaktha price of Rs. 20,00,000/­ on 29.12.2015 2nd defendant have received an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/­ from the plaintiff towards advance sale consideration by way of cash and executed a non possessory agreement of sale in favour of plaintiff on the same day on 29.12.2015.

18. The plaintiff further submitted that as per the terms of agreement of sale the plaintiff has to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.

15,00,000/­ from the date of agreement to get register the plaint schedule property in her favour and there is also interest clause the plaintiff paid an amount of Rs. 14,73,000/­ in total to the 2nd defendant on different spells. Even prior to the date of stipulated period, the plaintiff is ready willing to perform her contract and asked the 2nd defendant to come forward to perform his part of contract but the 2nd defendant postponed perform his part of contract or some pretext or other. Even though plaintiff is ready with the balance sale consideration the defendants are not coming forward to execute the register sale deed for which plaintiff issued a legal demand notice on 15.12.2019. The defendants did not choose to receive the said notice and got it returned and have not come forward to execute the deed. Hence present suit filed by the plaintiff.

18.On perusal of the evidence placed by the defendants, 1st defendant and 3rd defendant have not turned up to file any written statement on their behalf and have not challenged the contentions of the plaintiff.

Only the 2nd defendant has filed his written statement and deposed his evidence by examining himself as DW1 and in his written statement and in his chief affidavit, the 2nd defendant has totally denied the contentions of the plaintiff and he denied the execution of Ex.A1. He stated in his evidence that when he approached the husband of the plaintiff for 15

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. amounts, then the plaintiff’s husband has obtained signatures over blank document Ex.A1 except that no execution was done. The 2nd defendant did not choose to place any single piece of evidence to support his contentions that there is no execution of Ex.A1/deed and he did not even choose to examine any witnesses on his behalf to support his contentions. This crystal clearly shows that the 2nd defendant did not place single piece of evidence to support his version.

19.The plaintiff contended that Ex.A1 was executed by the 2nd defendant on receipt of consideration. On the other hand the 2nd defendant was denying the same. In the evidence of 2nd defendant, he contended that when he borrowed amounts from the husband of the plaintiff, husband of the plaintiff obtained his signatures on blank papers and he himself admitted the same in his chief affidavit stating that “ PW2 filed OS No. 13/2020 in Hon’ble III Addl. Junior Civil Judge’s

Court, Vijayawada. At the time of borrowing he obtained empty of Ex.A1 due to dispute arose between himself and PW2, he manipulated the

Ex.A1 in favour of PW1”. The above mentioned statement itself shows that 2nd defendant is admitting his signature over Ex.A1. The plaintiff by examined herself PW1 by examining herself husband PW2 by support her contention by filing document Ex.A1 to support her contentions. She has proved her case. The 1st and 3rd defendants have not chosen to file written statement to support their contentions on their behalf which is fatal to their case. The 2nd defendant formally denied all the contents of the plaint and did not choose to examined any witness on his behalf and he himself admitted that the signatures over Ex.A1 belongs to him.

Hence these issues are decided in favour of the plaintiff. 

20. ISSUE No.2:

16

OS 229/2019

III ASCJ/VJA. In the result, the suit is decreed with costs for specific performance of agreement of sale dt. 29.12.2015 directing the plaintiff to deposit the balance sale consideration into the court within one month from the date of this decree, on such deposit by the plaintiff, the defendants are directed to receive the said amount and execute the register sale deed in favour of the plaintiff or her nominee in respect of the plaint schedule property within further one month from the date of this decree on duly stamped papers supplied by the plaintiff in the manner of form required under law, in case the defendants failed to execute the above said sale deed as directed above, the plaintiff is at liberty to get it executed under due process of law.

Directly typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court, this the 12th day of March, 2025.

Sd/- R.Shanthi Sree,

III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION),

VIJAYAWADA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

(Witnesses examined for)

PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANT:

PW1: Parla PadmaDW1: Motepalli Naga Venkata Ramana PW2: Parla Subramanyam

DOCUMENTS MARKED

PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1:Sale deed dated 29.12.2015. Ex.A2:Office copy of legal notice dated 15.11.2019. Ex.A3:Postal receipts three in number. Ex.A4:Postal returned cover.

DEFENDANTS: 

­None­

Sd/­ R.Shanthi Sree, 

III ACJ(SD)/VJA.,

1

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, VIJAYAWADA

PRESENT: SMT.R.SHANTHI SREE,

III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, VIJAYAWADA

Tuesday, this the 11th day of March, 2025

OS No.253/2024

Between: 

Gotti Venkata Sivaiah, S/o. Lakshmana Rao, Age 52 years, R/o.D.No. 4­ 49, Boddapadu Village, Thotlavalluru Mandal, Krishna District. …Plaintiff AND

1. Smt. Akkineni Vijaya Lakshmi, W/o.Late Raja Babu, Age 65 years, R/o.D.No. 5­221, Near Sivalayam, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District.

2. Smt. Akkineni @ Kolli Nagamani, D/o. Late Raja Babu, Age 45 years, R/o.D.No. 5­221, Near Sivalayam, Poranki Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District.

… Defendants

This suit is coming on 10­03­2025 before me for plaintiff side evidence in the presence of Sri Ravuri Sarat Chandra,Advocate for the plaintiff and the defendants 1 and 2 are set exparte, after hearing and upon perusing the material on record, this Court delivered the following :

JUDGMENT

1.The suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendants for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 04.05.2021 and directing the defendants to execute and register sale deed in favour of the plaintiff by receiving balance sale consideration amount of Rs. 2,00,000/­ on duly stamped papers supplied by the plaintiff with regard to the plaint schedule property and or alternatively for refund of Rs. 29,45,000/­ with subsequent interest at 24% from the date of the suit till realization with costs.

2

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

2. The case of the plaintiff, as per the averments mentioned in the plaint is as follows:

The 1st defendant is no other than wife of one Akkineni Raja Babu and the 2nd defendant is the daughter of the above said Akkineni Raja

Babu and he is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property and due to his family needs and other circumstances, he made a proposal to sell away the plaint schedule property. As, the plaintiff is the resident of same village, the plaintiff informed his intention to purchase the plaint schedule property and after due discussions in between the plaintiff and said Akkineni Raja Babu, he fixed the sale consideration amount as Rs.

15,00,000/­ per Acre. The plaintiff also expressed his willingness to purchase the same to the above amount and the total value of the plaint schedule property was fixed as Rs.31.95.000/­ as the schedule property is an extent of Ac.2.13 cents. As such to confirm the sale transaction, the plaintiff paid an amount of Rs. 29,45,000/­ on 04.05.2021 itself towards advance sale consideration amount and agreed to pay the balance sale consideration amount of Rs.2,50,000/­ within 6 months. The plaintiff submits that on 04.05.2021, after receipt of the advance sale consideration amount, said Akkineni Raja Babu executed a written sale agreement in favour of the plaintiff with some terms and conditions. As per the above said sale agreement, if the plaintiff failed to pay the balance sale consideration amount within 6 months from the date of sale agreement, the plaintiff is liable to pay interest @18% per annum for the balance sale consideration amount, as well as if Akkineni Raja Babu failed to receive balance sale consideration amount and get registration of the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff, he is also liable to pay interest @ 18% per annum on the advance sale consideration amount. Further, he also agreed to arrange all the original records before 3

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

registration of the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff. He already arranged the balance sale consideration within the stipulated period and informed the same to the Akkineni Raja Babu and requested him to receive the consideration amount and register the plaint schedule property in of the plaintiff, but the reasons best known to him, he postponed the same from time to time and avoiding to receive the balance sale consideration amount and register the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff in spite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff. Further, it is also learned to the plaintiff that the above said

Akkineni Raja Babu also trying to alienate the plaint schedule property to some third parties by suppressing agreement of the plaintiff. In the said circumstances, the plain fready got issued a demand notice on 08.05.2023 itself by expressing his readiness to perform his part of the contract and send the notice to the above said Akkineni Raja Babu. The said Akkineni Raja Babu duly received he said notice and got issued a reply on 27.05.2023 with some false allegations­and requested the plaintiff to send a true copy of sale agreement, dated 04.05.2021 for his reference and also to issue suitable reply. After receipt of the said reply notice, the plaintiff also got issued a rejoinder with true facts by enclosing the true copy of the sale agreement, dated 04.05.2021 to his counsel on 01.06.2023 itself.

3.The plaintiff further submits that the above said Akkineni Raja

Babu duly received the said rejoinder along with copy of the sale agreement and visited the house of the plaintiff and admitted his guilt and he promised to register the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff and requested some more part payment to clear off his debts and informed that there is a threat from his creditors. As, there is no other go, by believing the words of Akkineni Raja Babu, the plaintiff once 4

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

again paid an amount of Rs.50,000/­out of the total sale consideration amount to him on 15.06.2023 and taken an endorsement on the back side of the original sale agreement, dated 04.05.2021 and the said endorsement was attested by two attestors. after receipt of the part of the balance sale consideration amount also, the above said Akkineni

Raja Babu dragged on the matter to register the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff with some false promises and finally it is learned by the plaintiff that the said Akkineni Raja Babu was died intestate in the month of February, 2024, by leaving the defendants 1 and 2 as his sole legal heirs. As such, after completion of funerals, when the plaintiff approached the 1st defendant and requested her to receive the balance sale consideration and register the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff along with 2nd defendant. But both the defendants / & 2 have also postponing the same from time to time with an assurance that both the defendants register the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff on the place of the deceased Akkineni Raja Babu Further, it is also learnt by the plaintiff that now, both the defendants colluded each other and trying to alienate the plaint schedule property in favour of some third parties by suppressing the sale agreement of the plaintiff for which both the defendants are not entitled, as the plaintiff is having a charge over the schedule property under Transfer of Property Act. due to the above said circumstances, the plaintiff has no option and got issued a registered legal notice on 24.10.2024 8. to the defendants 1 and 2 by expressing his ready and willingness with the balance sale consideration amount and he prepared to perform his part of the contract and demanded the defendants to come forward to receive the balance sale consideration amount and execute a regular regd. sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and handover all original title deed documents relating to the 5

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

plaint schedule property. It is further submitted that the defendants 1 and 2 intentionally returned the said notices with some false endorsement on 26.10.2024, which clearly shows the dishonest intention of the defendants by avoiding their part of the contract and in spite of the demand notice also, the defendants failed to comply the demand made by the plaintiff and who also failed to issue any reply to the notice of the plaintiff. Hence, the plaintiff is constrained to file the present suit seeking relief of Specific performance of an Agreement of sale, dated 04.05.2021, executed by the deceased Akkineni Raja Babu in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule proeprty, since the defendants failed to perform their part of the contract being the legal heirs of deceased Akkineni Raja Babu. Hence the suit.

4. On 30.01.2024 summons served to the defendants 1 and 2 as refused the summons to receive and defendants 1 and 2 called absent.

No representation till waited at 12.25 PM and again this court waited 5.00 PM and they are not appeared before the court and hence they are set exparte.

5. On behalf of plaintiff himself examined as PW1 through him got marked Exs.A1 to A11. And two more witnesses examined on behalf of plaintiff and they are 3rd parties to the suit and PW1 in his evidence has categorically deposed on par with the pleadings mentioned in the plaint.

6. Heard arguments of the plaintiff. Perused the material on record.

7.Now the point for consideration is:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of specific

performance of agreement of sale dated 04.05.2021?

or 

alternative relief of recovery of advance sale consideration of 

Rs.29,45,000/ along with interest @ 24% pa. from date of

suit till realization? 

6

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

POINT:­

8. The case of the plaintiff is that the 1st defendant is no other than wife of one Akkineni Raja Babu and the 2nd defendant is the daughter of the above said Akkineni Raja Babu and he is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property and due to his family needs and other circumstances, he made a proposal to sell away the plaint schedule property. As, the plaintiff is the resident of same village, the plaintiff informed his intention to purchase the plaint schedule property and after due discussions in between the plaintiff and said Akkineni Raja Babu, he fixed the sale consideration amount as Rs. 15,00,000/­ per Acre. The plaintiff also expressed his willingness to purchase the same to the above amount and the total value of the plaint schedule property was fixed as

Rs.31.95.000/­ as the schedule property is an extent of Ac.2.13 cents. As such to confirm the sale transaction, the plaintiff paid an amount of Rs.

29,45,000/­ on 04.05.2021 itself towards advance sale consideration amount and agreed to pay the balance sale consideration amount of

Rs.2,50,000/­ within 6 months. The plaintiff submits that on 04.05.2021, after receipt of the advance sale consideration amount, said

Akkineni Raja Babu executed a written sale agreement in favour of the plaintiff with some terms and conditions. As per the above said sale agreement, if the plaintiff failed to pay the balance sale consideration amount within 6 months from the date of sale agreement, the plaintiff is liable to pay interest @18% per annum for the balance sale consideration amount, as well as if Akkineni Raja Babu failed to receive balance sale consideration amount and get registration of the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff, he is also liable to pay interest @ 18% per 7

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

annum on the advance sale consideration amount. Further, he also agreed to arrange all the original records before registration of the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff. He already arranged the balance sale consideration within the stipulated period and informed the same to the Akkineni Raja Babu and requested him to receive the consideration amount and register the plaint schedule property in of the plaintiff, but the reasons best known to him, he postponed the same from time to time and avoiding to receive the balance sale consideration amount and register the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff in spite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff. Further, it is also learned to the plaintiff that the above said Akkineni Raja Babu also trying to alienate the plaint schedule property to some third parties by suppressing agreement of the plaintiff. In the said circumstances, the plain fready got issued a demand notice on 08.05.2023 itself by expressing his readiness to perform his part of the contract and send the notice to the above said Akkineni Raja Babu. The said Akkineni Raja

Babu duly received he said notice and got issued a reply on 27.05.2023 with some false allegations­and requested the plaintiff to send a true copy of sale agreement, dated 04.05.2021 for his reference and also to issue suitable reply. After receipt of the said reply notice, the plaintiff also got issued a rejoinder with true facts by enclosing the true copy of the sale agreement, dated 04.05.2021 to his counsel on 01.06.2023 itself. The above said Akkineni Raja Babu duly received the said rejoinder along with copy of the sale agreement and visited the house of the plaintiff and admitted his guilt and he promised to register the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff and requested some more part payment to clear off his debts and informed that there is a threat from his creditors. As, there is no other go, by believing the words of Akkineni 8

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

Raja Babu, the plaintiff once again paid an amount of Rs.50,000/­out of the total sale consideration amount to him on 15.06.2023 and taken an endorsement on the back side of the original sale agreement, dated 04.05.2021 and the said endorsement was attested by two attestors.

after receipt of the part of the balance sale consideration amount also, the above said Akkineni Raja Babu dragged on the matter to register the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff with some false promises and finally it is learned by the plaintiff that the said Akkineni

Raja Babu was died intestate in the month of February, 2024, by leaving the defendants 1 and 2 as his sole legal heirs. As such, after completion of funerals, when the plaintiff approached the 1st defendant and requested her to receive the balance sale consideration and register the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff along with 2nd defendant. But both the defendants / & 2 have also postponing the same from time to time with an assurance that both the defendants register the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiff on the place of the deceased Akkineni Raja Babu Further, it is also learnt by the plaintiff that now, both the defendants colluded each other and trying to alienate the plaint schedule property in favour of some third parties by suppressing the sale agreement of the plaintiff for which both the defendants are not entitled, as the plaintiff is having a charge over the schedule property under Transfer of Property Act. due to the above said circumstances, the plaintiff has no option and got issued a registered legal notice on 24.10.2024 8. to the defendants 1 and 2 by expressing his ready and willingness with the balance sale consideration amount and he prepared to perform his part of the contract and demanded the defendants to come forward to receive the balance sale consideration amount and execute a regular regd. sale deed in favour of the plaintiff 9

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

and handover all original title deed documents relating to the plaint schedule property. It i+9s further submitted that the defendants 1 and 2 intentionally returned the said notices with some false endorsement on 26.10.2024, which clearly shows the dishonest intention of the defendants by avoiding their part of the contract and in spite of the demand notice also, the defendants failed to comply the demand made by the plaintiff and who also failed to issue any reply to the notice of the plaintiff. Hence, the plaintiff is constrained to file the present suit seeking relief of Specific performance of an Agreement of sale, dated 04.05.2021, executed by the deceased Akkineni Raja Babu in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property, since the defendants failed to perform their part of the contract being the legal heirs of deceased Akkineni Raja Babu. 

9. The unchallenged testimony of PW1 to PW3 and the documentary evidence Exs.A1 to A11 which are Ex.A1/Agreement of sale dated 04.05.2021, Ex.A2/Office copy of legal notice dated 08.05.2023,

Ex.A3/Reply notice dated 27.05.2023, Ex.A4/Office copy of rejoinder notice dated 01.06.2023, Ex.A5/Postal acknowledgment, Ex.A6/Petition

dated 14.10.2024, Ex.A7/Office copy of legal notice dated 24.10.2024,

Ex.A8/Returned covers two in number, Ex.A9/Death Certificate of

Akkineni Raja Babu dated 17.02.2024, Ex.A10/Adangal copies four in number dated 31.10.2024 and Ex.A11/Part payment Endorsement

dated 15.06.2023 back side of first page of Ex.A1 are establishes that

there is no dispute about the ownership of the suit schedule property and execution of Ex.A1/Unregistered agreement of sale dated.24.04.2023 in favour of plaintiff by defendant. Therefore, the legitimate demand made by the plaintiff remained unchallenged, as such the defendant is bound to perform his part of agreement of sale by getting ready for 10

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

registration of sale. Hence, the plaintiff is entitled to enforce

Ex.A1/Agreement of sale dated 04.05.2021. But the plaintiff in his chief affidavit as PW1 stated that he came to know that the defendants has failed to complete.

10. The condition and terms in the agreement of sale dt. 04.05.2021 executed by the deceased Akkineni Raja Babu in favour of the plaintiff in respect of plaint schedule property since the defendants are the being the legal heirs of Akkineni Raja Babu and they are failed to perform their part of contract and the defendants failed to appear before the court and consequently they were set exparte in the main suit. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of the plaintiff.

11.On perusal of the plaint, as defendants set exparte and did not choose to defend their case. The evidence of plaintiff is unchallenged and hence this point is answered in favour of the plaintiff against the defendants.

10.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs for specific performance of agreement of sale dt. 04.05.2021 directing the plaintiff to deposit the balance sale consideration into the court within one month from the date of this decree of such deposit by the plaintiff, the defendants are directed to receive the said amount and execute the register sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property within further one month from the date of this decree on duly stamped papers supplied by the plaintiff in the manner of form required under law, in case the defendants failed to execute the above said sale deed as directed above, the plaintiff is at liberty to get it executed under due process of law.

Directly typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court this the 11th day of March, 2025.

Sd/­R.Shanthi Sree,

III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION),

VIJAYAWADA.

11

OS No. 253 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR 

PLAINTIFF : DEFENDANTS : 

PW.1: Gotti Vcnkata Sivaiah ­Set Exparte­ PW.2: Gorrela Venkateswara Rao PW.3: Pathuri Satyanarayana

DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A.1Agreement of sale dated 04.05.2021.

Ex.A.2Office copy of legal notice dated 08.05.2023.

Ex.A.3Reply notice dated 27.05.2023.

Ex.A.4Office copy of rejoinder notice dated 01.06.2023.

Ex.A.5Postal acknowledgment.

Ex.A.6Petition dated 14.10.2024.

Ex.A.7Office copy of legal notice dated 24.10.2024.

Ex.A.8Returned covers two in number.

Ex.A.9Death Certificate of Akkineni Raja Babu dated 17.02.2024.

Ex.A.10Adangal copies four in number dated 31.10.2024.

Ex.A.11Part payment Endorsement dated 15.06.2023 back side of first page of Ex.A1.

DEFENDANTS: Set Exparte.

 Sd/­R.Shanthi Sree, III ACJ(SD)/VJA.,

1

OS No. 155 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, VIJAYAWADA

PRESENT: SMT.R.SHANTHI SREE,

III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, VIJAYAWADA

Thursday, this the 27th day of March, 2025

OS No.155/2024

Between: 

Boska Sarojini, D/o. Boska Issac, Age 34 years, R/o. D.No. 4­14­10/4, Sharif Street, Chittanagar, Vijayawada, NTR District. …Plaintiff AND

Vakam Parvathi @ Vakula Parvathi, W/o. Vakam Rama Rao, Age 58 years, D.No. 76­14­142, New Joinagar, H.B. Colony, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada, NTR District­ 520012.

… Defendant 

This suit is coming on 26­03­2025 before me for plaintiff side evidence in the presence of Sri K.Nagendra Babu, Advocate for the plaintiff and the defendant set exparte, after hearing and upon perusing the material on record, this Court delivered the following : 

JUDGMENT

1. The suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 10.11.2023, by directing the defendant to execute a regular registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule property after receiving the balance of sale consideration of Rs. 18,00,000/­ within the time to be fixed by Hon’ble court and in case the defendant fails to execute the above said sale deed, the Hon’ble court may itself execute the sale deed for and on behalf of the defendant in respect of the suit schedule property at the costs of the plaintiff and to put the plaintiff in possession of the suit schedule property and alternatively for refund the Advance sale consideration of Rs. 10,00,000/­ along with interest @ 24% p.a.

from the date of respective payments till the date of realization of the plaintiff by creating charge over the plaint schedule property with costs.

2

OS No. 155 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

2. The case of the plaintiff, as per the averments mentioned in the plaint is as follows:

The defendant purchased the house plot with a hut from

Vijayawada Principal Junior Civil Judge’s Court on behalf of Karimullah,

S/o. Abdul Rahman, under registered sale deed on 09.08.2003 vide document No. 7298/2003 on the file of SRO, Vijayawada to an extent of 70­0 Sq.Yards covered RS No. 38/1, D.No. 76­14­142, Bhavanipuram,

Vijayawada Town, NTR District, the defendant became the absolute owner of the said property by virtue of the sale deed and has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment. The defendant wanted to sell the property of 70­0 Sq.Yards house site with a hut bearing D.No. 76­14­ 142, the plaintiff approached and expressed her willingness to purchase the same and after negotiations, consequently the plaintiff offered high price of Rs. 28,00,000/­ for which the defendant agreed and accepted.

The defendant having fully satisfied and agreed to sell the suit schedule property to the plaintiff. In fact, the defendant offered to sell the property is not fetching sufficient income and the sale consideration can be utilized for her family expenses. The defendant and plaintiff entered into a sale agreement dt. 10.11.2023 for the purchase of said house site and agreed price was Rs. 40,000/­ per Sq.Yards for total consideration of

Rs. 28,00,000/­. As per the terms of agreement, the plaintiff has already paid an advance amount of Rs. 10,00,000/­ in cash in the presence of the witnesses B.Rajesh and V Prasad Rao to the defendant and as per the sale agreement the defendant has to give the plaintiff possession of the plaint schedule property from 31.01.2024, which the defendant failed to do so. Remaining sale consideration of

Rs. 18,00,000/­ will be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant on or

before 06.03.2024 and the defendant have to execute a sale deed and to

3

OS No. 155 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

get it registered in the name of the plaintiff or in the name of the person requested by the plaintiff with the plaintiff’s own costs. In case of delay in payment by the plaintiff, she fully agrees that she will pay the defendant interest at the rate of 2% for the remaining sale consideration of Rs. 18,00,000/­ from 06.03.2024 till the date of execution of sale deed.

3.As per the sale agreement dt. 10.11.2023, the plaintiff was ready with the remaining sale consideration of Rs. 18,00,000/­ which was executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant is not at all coming forward to receive the remaining balance sale consideration and to register the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff as the reasons best known to the defendant. On 06.03.2024, the plaintiff demanded the defendant to execute the regular registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff, the defendant openly declared that they will not register as the price of the suit schedule property to 3rd parties and the plaintiff got issued a legal notice dt. 15.06.2024 through her counsel by way of Regd.

Post with Ack Due with a demand to register the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff. The said notice was returned with endorsement that addressee left without instructions received and thereafter the defendant kept quiet without performing her part of contract by giving evasive oral replies till to date. Plaintiff came to know that the defendant are going to sell away the plaint schedule property to others and the acts of the defendant clearly shows that she is deviating from the terms of the agreement of sale dt. 10.11.2023 by cheating the plaintiff and despite of lapse of 3 months, 27 days the defendant are not performing her part of contract. The plaintiff much suffering and hardship as she has paid huge amounts towards advance sale consideration. Hence, the plaintiff is constrained to file the present suit seeking relief of Specific performance 4

OS No. 155 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

of an Agreement of sale, dated 10.11.2023, executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property by directing the defendant to execute a regular registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule property after receiving the balance of sale consideration of Rs. 18,00,000/­ within the time to be fixed by Hon’ble court and in case the defendant fails to execute the above said sale deed, the Hon’ble court may itself execute the sale deed for and on behalf of the defendant in respect of the suit schedule property at the costs of the plaintiff and to put the plaintiff in possession of the suit schedule property and alternatively for refund the

Advance sale consideration of Rs. 10,00,000/­ along with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of respective payments till the date of realization of the plaintiff by creating charge over the plaint schedule property with costs. Hence the suit.

4. On 21.02.2025 summons served to the defendant through paper publication defendant called absent. No representation and she is not appeared before the court and hence she is set exparte.

5. On behalf of plaintiff himself examined as PW1 through him got marked Exs.A1 to A3 and PW1 in his evidence has categorically deposed on par with the pleadings mentioned in the plaint.

6. Heard arguments of the plaintiff. Perused the material on record.

7.Now the point for consideration is:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of specific

performance of agreement of sale dated 10.11.2023?

or 

alternative relief of recovery of advance sale consideration of 

Rs.28,00,000/­ along with interest @ 24% pa. from date of

suit till realization? 

5

OS No. 155 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

POINT:­

8. The case of the plaintiff is that The defendant purchased the house plot with a hut from Vijayawada Principal Junior Civil Judge’s Court on behalf of Karimullah, S/o. Abdul Rahman, under registered sale deed on 09.08.2003 vide document No. 7298/2003 on the file of SRO, Vijayawada to an extent of 70­0 Sq.Yards covered RS No. 38/1, D.No. 76­14­142,

Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada Town, NTR District, the defendant became the absolute owner of the said property by virtue of the sale deed and has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment. The defendant wanted to sell the property of 70­0 Sq.Yards house site with a hut bearing D.No.

76­14­142, the plaintiff approached and expressed her willingness to purchase the same and after negotiations, consequently the plaintiff offered high price of Rs. 28,00,000/­ for which the defendant agreed and accepted. The defendant having fully satisfied and agreed to sell the suit schedule property to the plaintiff. In fact, the defendant offered to sell the property is not fetching sufficient income and the sale consideration can be utilized for her family expenses. The defendant and plaintiff entered into a sale agreement dt. 10.11.2023 for the purchase of said house site and agreed price was Rs. 40,000/­ per Sq.Yards for total consideration of Rs. 28,00,000/­. As per the terms of agreement, the plaintiff has already paid an advance amount of Rs. 10,00,000/­ in cash in the presence of the witnesses B.Rajesh and V Prasad Rao to the defendant and as per the sale agreement the defendant has to give the plaintiff possession of the plaint schedule property from 31.01.2024, which the defendant failed to do so. Remaining sale consideration of

Rs. 18,00,000/­ will be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant on or

before 06.03.2024 and the defendant have to execute a sale deed and to

6

OS No. 155 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

get it registered in the name of the plaintiff or in the name of the person requested by the plaintiff with the plaintiff’s own costs. In case of delay in payment by the plaintiff, she fully agrees that she will pay the defendant interest at the rate of 2% for the remaining sale consideration of Rs. 18,00,000/­ from 06.03.2024 till the date of execution of sale deed. As per the sale agreement dt. 10.11.2023, the plaintiff was ready with the remaining sale consideration of Rs. 18,00,000/­ which was executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant is not at all coming forward to receive the remaining balance sale consideration and to register the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff as the reasons best known to the defendant. On 06.03.2024, the plaintiff demanded the defendant to execute the regular registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff, the defendant openly declared that they will not register as the price of the suit schedule property to 3rd parties and the plaintiff got issued a legal notice dt. 15.06.2024 through her counsel by way of Regd.

Post with Ack Due with a demand to register the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff. The said notice was returned with endorsement that addressee left without instructions received and thereafter the defendant kept quiet without performing her part of contract by giving evasive oral replies till to date. Plaintiff came to know that the defendant are going to sell away the plaint schedule property to others and the acts of the defendant clearly shows that she is deviating from the terms of the agreement of sale dt. 10.11.2023 by cheating the plaintiff and despite of lapse of 3 months, 27 days the defendant are not performing her part of contract. The plaintiff much suffering and hardship as she has paid huge amounts towards advance sale consideration. Hence, the plaintiff is constrained to file the present suit seeking relief of Specific performance of an Agreement of sale, dated 10.11.2023, executed by the defendant in 7

OS No. 155 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

favour of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property by directing the defendant to execute a regular registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule property after receiving the balance of sale consideration of Rs. 18,00,000/­ within the time to be fixed by Hon’ble court and in case the defendant fails to execute the above said sale deed, the Hon’ble court may itself execute the sale deed for and on behalf of the defendant in respect of the suit schedule property at the costs of the plaintiff and to put the plaintiff in possession of the suit schedule property and alternatively for refund the

Advance sale consideration of Rs. 10,00,000/­ along with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of respective payments till the date of realization of the plaintiff by creating charge over the plaint schedule property with costs.

9. The unchallenged testimony of PW1 and the documentary evidence

Exs.A1 to A3 which are Ex.A1/Unregistered sale agreement dated 10.11.2023, Ex.A2/Office copy of legal notice dated 15.06.2024 and

Ex.A3/ Returned postal cover and Ex.A1 are establishes that there is no dispute about the ownership of the suit schedule property and execution of Ex.A1/Unregistered agreement of sale dated.10.11.2023 in favour of plaintiff by defendant. Therefore, the legitimate demand made by the plaintiff remained unchallenged, as such the defendant is bound to perform his part of agreement of sale by getting ready for registration of sale. Hence, the plaintiff is entitled to enforce Ex.A1/Unregistered

Agreement of sale dated 10.11.2023. But the plaintiff in her chief affidavit as PW1 stated that she came to know that the defendant has failed to complete.

10. The condition and terms in the agreement of sale dt. 10.11.2023 executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff in respect of plaint 8

OS No. 155 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

schedule property and she failed to perform her part of contract and the defendant failed to appear before the court and consequently she was set exparte in the main suit. Accordingly, the point is answered in favour of the plaintiff.

11.On perusal of the plaint, as defendant set exparte and did not choose to defend her case. The evidence of plaintiff is unchallenged and hence this point is answered in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant.

12.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs for specific performance of agreement of sale dt. 10.11.2023 by directing the plaintiff to deposit the balance sale consideration into the court within one month from the date of this decree of such deposit by the plaintiff, the defendant is directed to receive the said amount and execute the register sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property within further one month from the date of this decree on duly stamped papers supplied by the plaintiff in the manner of form required under law, in case the defendant failed to execute the above said sale deed as directed above, the plaintiff is at liberty to get it executed under due process of law.

Directly typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court this the 27th day of March, 2025.

Sd/­R.Shanthi Sree, 

III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION),

VIJAYAWADA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR 

PLAINTIFF : DEFENDANT : 

PW.1: Boska Sarojini ­Set Exparte­ 9

OS No. 155 of 24, IIIASCJ,VJA

DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A.1Unregistered sale agreement dated 10.11.2023.

Ex.A.2Office copy of legal notice dated 15.06.2024.

Ex.A.3Returned postal cover.

DEFENDANT: Set Exparte.

 Sd/­R.Shanthi Sree, III ACJ(SD)/VJA.,

1

OS 30/24,IIICJ(SD),VJA

 IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION):

VIJAYAWADA

PRESENT: Smt R. Shanthi Sree, 

III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION),VIJAYAWADA.

Wednesday, this the 09th day of April, 2025

OS No.30/2024

Between:

Chinthamaneni Geetha Kumari, W/o. Late Venkata Ratnam, Age 68 years, properties, R/o.D.No. 6/64, Punnadipadu Village, Kankipadu Mandal, Krishna District. … Plaintiff A N D 

Koneru Subrahmanyeswar Rao, S/o. Late Gopal Rao, Age 70 years, Properties, R/o. H.No. 1­734, Main Road,Krishna Nagar, Chilakaluripeta, Guntur District – 522 616.

... Defendant

This suit is coming on 09­04­2025 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri T.V.Nava Kumar, Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant set exparte and after hearing the plaintiff’s counsel and upon perusing the material on record, this Court delivered the following:

J U D G M E N T 

1.This suit is filed by the plaintiff for recovery of a sum of

Rs.21,17,921/­ (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Seventeen Thousand and Nine

Hundred Twenty One Only) with interest @ 24% per annum on the

principal sum of Rs. 5,00,000/­ each dt 06.04.2015, dt 02.03.2018 from

the date of the suit till date of the realization and for costs of the suit. 

2. The case of the plaintiff, as per the averments mentioned in the plaint is as follows:

The defendant is having acquaintance with the plaintiff family for the last several years and on that the defendant borrowed an amount of

Rs.5,00,000/­ on 06­04­2015 from the plaintiff to meet their family necessities and for the consideration received at Punadipadu, the defendant 2

OS 30/24,IIICJ(SD),VJA

executed a promissory note in favour of the Plaintiff, with his own handwriting agreeing to repay the said sum along with interest @ 24% p.a.

either to the plaintiff or her order on demand at the place of the Plaintiff.

Thereafter the defendant paid part payments of Rs. 1,20,000/­ on 14­03­ 2016, and another part payment of Rs. 1.20.000/­ on 21­03­2018 and another part payment of Rs. 1,000/­ on 20­01­2021 to the Plaintiff towards part payment of the above said promissory note debt and the defendant acknowledged and endorsed the part payments on the back side of the promissory note on the respective dates. In addition to the above said promissory note transaction as the defendant is need of money for his family necessities he borrowed another sum of Rs.5,00,000/­on 02­03­2018 and for the consideration received at Punadipadu the defendant executed promissory note in favour of the Plaintiff with his own handwriting agreeing to repay the said sum along with interest @24% p.a. either to the plaintiff or her order on demand at the place of the Plaintiff and the defendant also paid the part payment of Rs. 1,000/­ on 20­01­2021 to the Plaintiff and acknowledged and endorsed on the back side of the promissory note on the respective date.

3.The plaintiff humbly submits that subsequently the plaintiff herself and on her behalf made several request and reminders to discharge the due amount under the above said two promissory notes and the defendant made believe the plaintiff that he is going to discharge the due amount with interest either this day or, the other and made several vague and false promises and successfully drag the matter till date and the plaintiff is under the impression that the defendant will discharge the due amount as promised by him and in such circumstances the plaintiff is unable to send a demand notice to the defendant, but the Defendant did not choose to 3

OS 30/24,IIICJ(SD),VJA

keep up his promise and thus the Plaintiff constrained to file the present suit for recovery of the due amounts from the Defendant under the above said two promissory notes along with accrued interest. Hence the suit.

4. On 03.04.2025 plaintiff filed paper publication. Defendant called absent.

No representation. He did not appear before the Court, he was set ex­parte.

5. On behalf of the plaintiff PW1 was examined, Ex.A1 to A3 were marked. 

6.Heard plaintiff. Perused the material on record.

7.Point for consideration is:

“Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit claim from the defendant as prayed?”

POINT: 

8.The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant is having acquaintance with the plaintiff family for the last several years and on that the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.5,00,000/­ on 06­04­2015 from the plaintiff to meet their family necessities and for the consideration received at

Punadipadu, the defendant executed a promissory note in favour of the

Plaintiff, with his own handwriting agreeing to repay the said sum along with interest @ 24% p.a. either to the plaintiff or her order on demand at the place of the Plaintiff. Thereafter the defendant paid part payments of

Rs. 1,20,000/­ on 14­03­2016, and another part payment of Rs. 1.20.000/­ on 21­03­2018 and another part payment of Rs. 1,000/­ on 20­01­2021 to the Plaintiff towards part payment of the above said promissory note debt and the defendant acknowledged and endorsed the part payments on the back side of the promissory note on the respective dates. In addition to the above said promissory note transaction as the defendant is need of money 4

OS 30/24,IIICJ(SD),VJA

for his family necessities he borrowed another sum of Rs.5,00,000/­on 02­ 03­2018 and for the consideration received at Punadipadu the defendant executed promissory note in favour of the Plaintiff with his own handwriting agreeing to repay the said sum along with interest @24% p.a. either to the plaintiff or her order on demand at the place of the Plaintiff and the defendant also paid the part payment of Rs. 1,000/­ on 20­01­2021 to the

Plaintiff and acknowledged and endorsed on the back side of the promissory note on the respective date.

9.The plaintiff humbly submits that subsequently the plaintiff herself and on her behalf made several request and reminders to discharge the due amount under the above said two promissory notes and the defendant made believe the plaintiff that he is going to discharge the due amount with interest either this day or, the other and made several vague and false promises and successfully drag the matter till date and the plaintiff is under the impression that the defendant will discharge the due amount as promised by him and in such circumstances the plaintiff is unable to send a demand notice to the defendant, but the Defendant did not choose to keep up his promise and thus the Plaintiff constrained to file the present suit for recovery of the due amounts from the Defendant under the above said two promissory notes along with accrued interest.

10. The plaintiff to prove her contentions filed her chief­affidavit as PW.1, and Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are marked which are Ex.A1/Promissory note dated 06.04.2015, Ex.A2/Part payment endorsement of Ex.A1 dated 14.03.2016,

Ex.A3/ Another part payment endorsement on Ex.A1 dated 21.03.2018,

Ex.A4/Another part payment endorsement on Ex.A1 dated 20.01.2021,

Ex.A5/Another promissory note dated 02.03.2018 and Ex.A6/ Part payment endorsement on Ex.A5 dated 20.01.2021 and to substantiate her 5

OS 30/24,IIICJ(SD),VJA

case filed promissory notes said to be executed by the defendant on 06.04.2015 and 02.03.2018 which were marked as Exs.A1 and Ex.A5.

11.As the defendant remained exparte whatever the oral and documentary evidence submitted by the plaintiff remained unchallenged, thereby substantiating the contentions of the plaintiff that, defendant having borrowed the amount defaulted in repayment, thereby is due to pay the debt under Exs.A1 and A5 along with interest. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of the plaintiff.

12.In the result, the suit is decreed with costs in favour of the plaintiff for an amount of Rs.21,17,921/­ (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Seventeen

Thousand and Nine Hundred Twenty One Only) together with subsequent interest @ 12% per annum, from the date of suit till the date of decree, and thereafter at 6% per annum till realization on principal amounts of

Rs. 5,00,000/­ each.

Directly typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 09th day of April, 2025.

Sd/­ R.Shanthi Sree,

III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE(SENIOR DIVISION),

VIJAYAWADA.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

(Witnesses examined for)

PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANT:

PW.1: Chinthamaneni Geetha Kumar­ Exparte­

DOCUMENTS MARKED 

FOR PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1: Promissory note dated 06.04.2015. Ex.A2: Part payment endorsement of Ex.A1 dated 14.03.2016 Ex.A3: Another part payment endorsement on Ex.A1 dated 21.03.2018. Ex.A4: Another part payment endorsement on Ex.A1 dated 6

OS 30/24,IIICJ(SD),VJA

20.01.2021. Ex.A5: Another promissory note dated 02.03.2018. Ex.A6: Part payment endorsement on Ex.A5 dated 20.01.2021.

FOR DEFENDANT:

­Exparte­

Sd/­ R.Shanthi Sree,  III ACJ(SD)/VJA.,

1

OS 63/23, IIIACJ(SD), VJA

IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION) : AT VIJAYAWADA

PRESENT: SMT.R.SHANTHI SREE, III Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Vijayawada.

Friday, this the 28th day of February, 2025

OS No.63/2023

Between :

Tanneru Sravanthi, W/o. Tanneru Koteswara Rao, Age 36 years, House Wife, R/o. D.No. 2413­1, Sangasetty Vari Street, Bavajipet, Vijayawada­ 520 003.

…Plaintiff

 And

1. Sirigudi Indumathi, W/o. Late Sirigudi Murali Krishna, Age 50 yers, R/o. D.No. 41­3­47, Near by Biyyuapukotla Bazar, Chitrakuta Ashramam, Krishnalanka, Vijayawada­13.

2. Sirigudi Jaya Surya, S/o. Late Sirigudi Murali Krishna, Age 26 years, R/o. D.No. 41­3­47, Near by Biyyapukotla Bazar, Chitrakuta Ashramam, Krishnalanka, Vijayawada­13.

3. Sirigudi Jaya Bhargava, S/o. Late Sirigudi Murali Krishna, Age 26 years, R/o. D.No. 41­3­47, Near by Biyyapukotla Bazar, Chitrakuta Ashramam, krishnalanka, Vijayawada­13.

…Defendants

This suit is coming on this day before me, in the presence of Sri A.Suryaramanjaneyulu, advocate for plaintiff and Sri P.Krishna Rao, Advocate for Defendants and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court has delivered the following :

J U D G M E N T

1. This suit is filed by the plaintiff for recovery of a sum of Rs.25,78,000/­ with interest @24% p.a from the date of suit till the date of realization and for costs of the suit. 

2. PW.1 called absent, no representation, for appearance of PW.1 even though many adjournments are given to the plaintiff to defend the case, plaintiff is not turning up and this court waited till 5.30 p.m. and PW.1 called absent, no representation and hence this suit is dismissed for default.

(Pronounced by me in the open Court, this the 28th day of February, 2025)

Sd/­ R.Shanthi Sree,

III Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division),

Vijayawada.

2

OS 63/23, IIIACJ(SD), VJA

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

(Witnesses examined for)

PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANTS:

PW.1: Tanneru Sravanthi­None­

DOCUMENTS MARKED 

FOR PLAINTIFF:

Ex.A1: Suit Promissory note dated 10.03.2020.

FOR DEFENDANTS:

­None­

 Sd/­ R.Shanthi Sree,

III ACJ(SD)/VJA.,