Bangalore District Court
Sunitha Y S vs Nethravathi B N on 2 February, 2026
/ 1 /
O.S.No.9150/2024
KABC010331212024
IN THE COURT OF XLII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-43)
- : PRESENT :-
Chinnannavar Rajesh Sadashiv,
XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
Dated this 2nd Day of February, 2026.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.9150/2024
Plaintiff :
Smt.Sunitha Y.S. W/o. P.N. Suresh
Kumar, 36 Years, Occ : Business,
R/o.No.45/1 G Vajrappa Building,
B.G.Road,Opposite SLV Bar,
Bannerghatta Road, Bengaluru - 76.
[By Sri.Sudhir Kumar, Advocate]
/ VERSUS /
Defendant :
Smt.B.N.Nethravathi, 41 Years,
W/o.P.Srinivasmurthy, Occupation :
/ 2 /
O.S.No.9150/2024
Housewife, R/o.No.97, Pattanagere,
Rajarajeshwarinagar, Bengaluru - 98.
[By Sri.P.Yogesh, Advocate]
***
Date of Institution of the suit : 19.12.2024
Suit for specific
Nature of suit : performance of contract
and permanent injunction
Date of commencement of
: 11.08.2025
evidence
Date on which the judgment
: 02.02.2026
is pronounced
Years Months Days
Duration taken for disposal :
01 01 11
***
JUDGMENT
This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for the relief of specific performance of contract with respect to suit property bearing Site No.98 situated at Pattanagere Village, Kengeri Hobli, measuring 23 x 28 Ft. more specifically described in the plaint schedule.
/ 3 / O.S.No.9150/2024
2. The case of the plaintiff in brief is as under :
Defendant is the absolute owner of the suit property by virtue of sale deed dated 29.12.2014. Her name is appearing in the revenue records, she is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property. She was in need of money and hence, she offered the suit property for sale. Plaintiff has agreed to purchase the suit property on the price quoted by the defendant for Rs.13 Lakhs. Accordingly, defendant has executed a registered agreement of sale in favour of the plaintiff on 26.2.2024 by receiving advance sale consideration of Rs. 11 Lakhs made by the plaintiff through RTGS. Defendant has agreed to execute the sale deed within six months by receiving the balance consideration amount of Rs.2 Lakhs. It is further case of the plaintiff that defendant / 4 / O.S.No.9150/2024 has handed over her original title deeds i.e., sale deed, khata certificate and khata extract to the plaintiff. It is further case of the plaintiff that, she is ever ready and willing to perform her part of contract, but defendant is not ready to execute the sale deed. She disobeyed her promise. Plaintiff requested the defendant to execute the sale deed as she has received 75% of the consideration amount. But, defendant went on postponing the same on one or the other pretext. Plaintiff lastly got issued legal notice on 26.2.2024 calling upon the defendant to execute sale deed. But, defendant neither replied notice nor executed sale deed. Cause of action arose to the plaintiff on the date of agreement of sale and on the date of legal notice and it continued. So, plaintiff prayed to grant the decree of specific performance of contract and / 5 / O.S.No.9150/2024 grant a decree of permanent injunction with respect to possession over the suit property and costs of the suit.
3. On issuance of suit summons defendant appeared through her advocate and filed written statement. She has admitted that she is the owner and possessor of the suit property. She has also admitted that she has got acquaintance with the plaintiff. But, she has denied that she has executed an agreement of sale in question and received Rs.11 Lakhs as advance sale consideration amount from the plaintiff. She denied the contents of the plaint in para-wise and has specifically contended that she has received Rs.2 Lakh from the plaintiff as hand loan by agreeing to repay the same with 5% interest. The document in question was executed by her as a security to the said loan and it was not real / 6 / O.S.No.9150/2024 agreement of sale. But, plaintiff has got executed the document styled as agreement of sale. She came to know about this document only after filing of the suit. She also contended the market value of the suit property was more than Rs.50 Lakhs and hence, she executing the agreement of sale just for Rs.13 Lakhs is improbable. So, she prayed to dismiss the suit with costs.
4. On the basis of the above pleadings, I have framed the following issues :
(1) Whether the plaintiff proves that defendant has executed registered agreement of sale dated 26.2.2024 in her favour by agreeing to sell the schedule property for Rs.13.00 lakhs by receiving advance consideration of Rs.11.00 lakhs ?
(2) Whether the plaintiff proves that she is ever ready and willing to perform her part of contract ?
/ 7 / O.S.No.9150/2024 (3) Whether the plaintiff proves that she is entitle for the discretionary relief of specific performance of contract of the contract ?
(4) Whether defendant proves that the document in question was executed by her as a security to the loan of Rs. 2.00 lakhs and it was not real agreement of sale ?
(5) Whether the plaintiff is entitle for the relief of permanent injunction as prayed for ?
(6) What order or decree?
5. In order to prove the case, plaintiff has got examined herself as P.W.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to P.11. Defendant neither cross-examined P.W.1 nor entered the witness box.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff. But, the learned counsel for defendant was absent and in / 8 / O.S.No.9150/2024 spite of sufficient opportunity, defendant has not chosen to cross-examine plaintiff, lead her evidence and argue the case. Hence, argument of defendant was taken as 'Nil' and the case was posted for judgment.
7. Perused the pleadings, issues, evidence oral and documentary and the materials on record.
8. My findings to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the affirmative.
Point No.2 : In the affirmative.
Point No.3 : In the affirmative.
Point No.4 : In the negative.
Point No.5 : In the negative.
Point No.6 : As per the final order for the
following:
REASONS
9. POINTS NO.1 TO 4 : - Since the reasoning for these issues are interrelated and overlap with each other, to / 9 / O.S.No.9150/2024 prevent repetition of facts and for convenience and appreciation of evidence, they are taken together for consideration.
10. In order to prove the case, plaintiff has got examined herself as P.W.1 and she filed evidence affidavit by reiterating the contents of the plaint. Ex.P.4 is the original title deeds of the defendant i.e., original sale deed handed over by the defendant in favour of plaintiff at the time of agreement of sale and plaintiff has produced this document from her custody. Ex.P.5 is the Uttara Patra, Ex.P.6 is the Khata Certificate, Ex.P.7 is the Khata Extract, Ex.P.8 is again Khata Certificate and Ex.P.9 is the Khata Extract of the suit property. Plaintiff has produced these original documents from her custody.
/ 10 / O.S.No.9150/2024
11. Ex.P.1 is the registered agreement of sale executed by defendant in favour of the plaintiff. As per this document, defendant has agreed to sell the suit property for Rs.13 Lakhs. The measurement of the suit property is just 23 Ft. x 28 Ft. = 644 Sq.Ft. The consideration amount fixed was Rs.13 Lakhs. So, looking to the measurement of the property, the consideration fixed appears to be proper and correct. The agreement was duly registered before the sub-registrar. Defendant has admitted about execution of the document. Under Ex.P.1 plaintiff has transferred Rs.11 Lakhs to the defendant through RTGS. In the agreement of sale itself the details of RTGS is mentioned. Defendant has appeared before the Sub-Registrar and executed this / 11 / O.S.No.9150/2024 document. It is her contention that this agreement was security to the loan of Rs. 2 Lakhs. But, she has not at all proved the said contention either by cross-examining the P.W.1 or entering the witness box. Ex.P.2 is the encumbrance certificate which discloses that the property was free from encumbrance. Ex.P.3 is the legal notice dated 26.8.2024. As per the agreement of sale the time fixed was six months and the remaining consideration amount to be paid by the plaintiff was just Rs. 2 Lakhs. From the date of agreement of sale the legal notice dated 26.8.2024 is within the period of six months. Ex.P.3 (a) is the postal receipt and Ex.P.3(b) is the track consignment report, which discloses that the said notice or item was delivered to the addressee on 30.8.2024 at 4.22 p.m. But, the defendant has not at all taken any / 12 / O.S.No.9150/2024 steps to reply the notice. Ex.P.10 is the tax paid receipts and these receipts are handed over by the defendant to the plaintiff at the time of execution of agreement of sale.
12. The agreement of sale in favour of plaintiff is without possession, but the defendant has handed over the original title deeds to the plaintiff. Plaintiff was ever ready and willing to perform her part of contract. She paid 75% of the consideration amount through RTGS. She has got issued legal notice within six months as agreed in the agreement of sale. The conduct of the defendant shows that she was never ready and willing to perform her part of contract. Ex.P.11 is the statement of account of the plaintiff held in Central Bank of India. The statement is from 9.10.2024 to 14.12.2024. As on 19.10.2024 she was holding the balance of Rs. 6,78,113/-
/ 13 / O.S.No.9150/2024 and as on 14.12.2024 she was holding balance of Rs.3,13,553/-. So, she had the capacity to pay the remaining consideration amount of Rs. 2 Lakhs to the defendant. Plaintiff has paid more than 75% of the sale consideration amount under the agreement of sale and she was capable to pay remaining amount also. But, defendant was not ready and willing to perform her part of contract. She has not proved that the market value of the suit property as on the date of agreement of sale was more than Rs.50 Lakhs and she has not proved that the said agreement of sale was just security to the loan. So, absolutely there is no reason to reject the evidence of the plaintiff. The agreement of sale is subsequent to amendment of Specific Performance of Contract Act. So, plaintiff is entitle for the relief of specific performance of / 14 / O.S.No.9150/2024 contract. Hence, I answer Issues No.1 to 3 in the affirmative and Issue No.4 in the negative.
13. ISSUE NO.5 : - Plaintiff has claimed the relief of permanent injunction. But, as per the agreement of sale itself and as per the averments of the plaint, the possession of the suit property was not at all delivered to the plaintiff. So, plaintiff is not entitle for the relief of permanent injunction with respect to possession over the suit property. Hence, I answer Issue No.5 in the negative.
14. ISSUE NO.6 : - In view of my finding to Issue No.1 to 5 as above, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is decreed in part with costs.
/ 15 / O.S.No.9150/2024 Defendant is directed to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and perform her part of contract as per agreement of sale dated 26.2.2024 by receiving the remaining sale consideration amount of Rs.2 Lakhs, within 90 days from the date of this Order, failing which plaintiff can get execute the sale deed through due process of law.
The relief of permanent injunction claimed by the plaintiff is rejected.
Draw a decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-I, transcribed by her, corrected the same directly on computer, signed and then pronounced by me, in open court on this the 2nd day of February, 2026).
(Chinnannavar Rajesh Sadashiv), XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
*** / 16 / O.S.No.9150/2024 ANNEXURE
1. List of witnesses examined for the plaintiff :
P.W.1 : Smt.Sunitha Y.S.
2. List of documents exhibited for the plaintiff :
Ex.P.1 : Original agreement of sale dated 26.2.2024 Ex.P.2 : C/c of encumbrance certificate Ex.P.3 : Office copy of legal notice Ex.P.3(a) & (b) : Postal receipt and Track consignment report Ex.P.4 : Original sale deed dated 29.12.2014 Ex.P.5 : Uttara Patra Ex.P.6 : Khata certificate Ex.P.7 : BBMP khata extract Ex.P.8 : Khata certificate Ex.P.9 : Khata extract Ex.P.10 : Tax paid receipts Ex.P.11 : Statement of account of plaintiff in Central Bank of India
3. List of witnesses examined for the defendant :
- NIL -
/ 17 / O.S.No.9150/2024
4. List of documents exhibited for the defendant :
- NIL -
(Chinnannavar Rajesh Sadashiv), XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
*** / 18 / O.S.No.9150/2024 Judgment pronounced in open Court [vide separate Judgment] :
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is decreed in part with costs.
Defendant is directed to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and perform her part of contract as per agreement of sale dated 26.2.2024 by receiving the remaining sale consideration amount of Rs.2 Lakhs, within 90 days from the date of this Order, failing which plaintiff can get execute the sale deed through due process of law.
/ 19 / O.S.No.9150/2024 The relief of permanent injunction claimed by the plaintiff is rejected.
Draw a decree accordingly.
(Chinnannavar Rajesh Sadashiv), XLII ACC&S Judge, Bengaluru City.