D.M. Dharmadhikari JUDGMENT
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J.
1. These two cross appeals have been preferred against common judgment dated 24.4.2001 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Madras by which decree of Specific Performance of Contract of Sale of the suit property granted by the learned single judge has been set aside with certain directions to adjust the equities between the parties.
2. The facts of the present case should be an eye opener to functionaries in law courts at all levels that delay more often defeats justice invariably adds complications to the already complicated issues involved in cases coming before them, and makes their duties more onerous by requiring them to adjust rights and equities arising from delay.
3. This introductory comment is occasioned by the fact that against the judgment of the learned single judge passed on 6.9.1988 the appeal was earlier heard by the Division Bench of the High Court on 22.3.1989 but it passed the judgment after a period of about five years on 24.1.1994. It dismissed the appeal and confirmed the decree of Specific Performance of the Contract granted by the single judge.
4. In appeal preferred by the defendants, this Court by order passed on 13.1.2000 MANU/SC/0028/2000 : [2000]1SCR254 remanded the appeal to the Division Bench of the High Court for a fresh decision only because of long gap of five years in hearing arguments and decision of appeal by the High Court.
5. After remand the Division Bench reheard the appeal and by the impugned judgment dated 24.4.2001 has allowed it. The decree granted by the learned single judge of partial relief of Specific Performance of Contract of Sale of life interest of the vendor in the suit properly has been set aside.
6. With this background the facts of the case may be stated:-
The owner of the suit property namely, Mouna Gurusamy Naicker, (hereinafter referred to as the 'vendor' ) grandfather of respondent No. 6 (G. D. Narendra Kullamma Naicker) executed a Will and two Codicils on 7.3.1948. Under the Will, the vendor herein was bequeathed the right of enjoyment during his life, of the estate of the testator, including the suit property (described as Municipal Door No. 36C, Mount Road, Madras-600 002) but without powers of alienation. In the Will, it was provided that after the death of the vendor, his male issue living at the time of his death would take all the properties absolutely. In the absence of any such male issue of the vendor, the properties would be taken by other descendants (hereinafter referred to as the 'reversioners' ).
7. Shri M.G.Naicker, the testator died on 23.10.1956. On 26.6.1977, the vendor entered into an agreement of sale of the suit property with the appellant HPA International, a partnership firm (hereinafter referred to as the vendee ). It was clearly recited in the agreement that the sale of the property was necessitated because of the pressing demands of public authorities towards, dues and tax liabilities on the estate and likelihood of coercive recovery of public dues by attachment and