[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
P.Sirajudheen vs Mohammed Shareef on 4 February, 2026
Author: Sathish Ninan
Bench: Sathish Ninan
2026:KER:9375
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. KRISHNA KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 15TH MAGHA, 1947
RFA NO. 907 OF 2015
AGAINST THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT DATED 06.08.2015 IN OS NO.6
OF 2014 OF SUB COURT, MANJERI
-----
APPELLANT/DEFENDANT IN THE SUIT:
P.SIRAJUDHEEN,
S/O. PALLIYALI ABDUL KHADER HAJI,
OORAKAM KEEZHMURI AMSOM, DESOM, VENGARA P.O.,
THIRURANGADI TALUK - 676 304.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.VINOD BHAT
SRI.LEGITH T.KOTTAKKAL
RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS IN THE SUIT:
1 MOHAMMED SHAREEF,
S/O. NEDUVANCHERY AHAMEDUNNI, NEDUVANCHERY HOUSE,
KERALADEESWARAPURAM AMSOM, DESOM, TIRUR TALUK,
KERALDEESWARAPURAM P.O., PIN - 676 307.
2 MOIDEENKUTTY
S/O. NEDUVANCHERY SAIDU MOHAMMED, NEDUVANCHERY HOUSE,
PONMUNDAM AMSOM, DESOM, TIRUR TALUK,
PONMUNDAM P.O - 676 106.
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON
04.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:9375
SATHISH NINAN &
P. KRISHNA KUMAR, JJ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
R.F.A. No.907 of 2015
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 4th day of February, 2026
J U D G M E N T
Sathish Ninan, J.
The suit for recovery of balance sale consideration under an
agreement for sale, was decreed by the trial court. The defendant
is in appeal.
2. The plaint 'A' schedule consists of three items of
properties. It belonged to six persons who are not parties to
suit.
3. On 13.09.2010, Ext.A1 agreement was entered into between
the plaintiffs, defendant, and six others who are the owners,
whereunder 'A' schedule property was agreed to be conveyed by
the owners, to the plaintiffs. The entire property was put in
possession of the plaintiffs. From out of the total consideration
payable, though substantial portion was paid, the plaintiffs were
unable to pay the balance. In the meanwhile, the plaintiffs
2026:KER:9375
purchased 16.250 acres of property from the 'A' schedule item
No.3, from its owners.
4. Since the plaintiffs were unable to perform the agreement
in its entirety, after negotiations, the parties entered into
Ext.A3 agreement dated 01.12.2011 whereunder the plaintiffs
agreed to transfer the property to the defendant or nominees for
a total consideration of ₹ 6,46,60,000/-, ie. at the rate of
10,600/- per cent. On the date of Ext.A3, ₹ 2,60,00,000/- was
paid as advance. The balance sale consideration payable was
₹ 3,86,60,000/-. Further advances were also paid.
5. From out of the entire extent, an extent of 45 acres was
conveyed by its owners to third parties. The 16.250 acres which
the plaintiffs had purchased from its owners was not conveyed.
6. The total value payable for the 45 acres conveyed, at the
rate of ₹ 10,600/- per cent, is ₹ 4,77,00,000/-. After deducting
the various advances paid by the defendant, the plaintiffs claim
that a further amount of ₹ 92,13,000/- is due to them towards the
value of the 45 acres.
7. The defendant, while admitting Exts.A1 and A3 agreements,
denied the entitlement and right of the plaintiffs to claim any
2026:KER:9375
amount. He prayed for dismissal of the suit.
8. The trial court held that, in terms of Ext.A3 agreement,
balance amount is payable to the plaintiffs towards the
consideration of 45 acres. Accordingly, a decree was granted for
the same.
9. We have heard Sri.S.Vinod Bhat, the learned counsel for
the appellant-defendant and Sri.Jamsheed Hafiz, the learned
counsel for the respondents-plaintiffs.
10. The points that arise for determination in this appeal
are :-
(i) Is the plaint claim laid on Ext.A3 agreement for sale sustainable under
law ?
(ii) The plaintiffs being not the owners of the property conveyed, are they
entitled to maintain the suit for recovery of the balance sale consideration relying
upon Ext.A3 agreement ?
(iii) Does the decree and judgment of the trial court warrant any
interference ?
11. The suit is for recovery of unpaid sale consideration.
The suit is upon Ext.A3, which is only an agreement for sale. As
per Ext.A3, an extent of 45 acres of which the plaintiffs are not
the owners, is agreed to be conveyed to the defendant or his
nominee for a consideration of ₹ 10,600/- per cent. The agreement
2026:KER:9375
also relates to 16.25 acres which belongs to the plaintiffs.
Admittedly the plaintiffs are not willing to convey 16.25 acres
belonging to them. The plaintiffs claim is that the 45 acres
which belonged to third parties was, in pursuance of Ext.A3
agreement for sale, conveyed to the nominees of the defendant.
Various amounts were received under Ext.A3 as advance. The claim
is for the balance amount payable as per Ext.A3, for the extent
of 45 acres, at the agreed rate of ₹ 10,600/- per cent.
12. The plaintiffs are not the owners of the 45 acres
conveyed. The sale deed/s are not brought on record. There is no
material to find that there is any unpaid sale consideration. The
plaintiffs not being the owners/sellers is not entitled to unpaid
sale consideration, if at all any, unless there is a tripartite
agreement involving the owner and entitling them for the same.
Ext.A3 is not such an agreement entered into between the
plaintiffs and the owners of the property. The liability to pay
the purchase price is on the buyer.
13. So also, a sale deed having been executed, the
plaintiffs cannot maintain the suit for recovery of alleged
unpaid sale consideration founding the suit upon the agreement
2026:KER:9375
for sale dehors the sale deed/s.
14. The owners/sellers of the property who are to say
whether there is any unpaid sale consideration, are not even
parties to the suit. Ext.A3 is only an agreement for sale. The
above are sufficient enough to reject the claim of the
plaintiffs. The trial court has not considered the above aspects
while granting decree in favour of the plaintiffs. The plaint
claim is unsustainable.
In the result, this appeal is allowed. The decree and
judgment of the trial court are set aside and the suit will stand
dismissed.
Sd/-
SATHISH NINAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
P. KRISHNA KUMAR
JUDGE
kns/-
//True Copy//
P.S. To Judge
