The predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs had entered into an agreement for sale with defendants 1 and 2. But defendants 1 and 2 sold the property to defendants 3 and 4 on the premise that the predecessor- in-interest of the plaintiffs did not perform his part of the contract. The suit was accordingly laid for specific performance of the agreement and in the alternative for return of the advance amount paid. 2. One of the cardinal issues in the suit is as to whether the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs had the financial capacity to perform his part of the contract. The evidence on the side of the plaintiffs as well as the defendants was recorded and the same was closed. Subsequently defendants 1 and 2 obtained information under the Right to Information Act about the indebtedness of the plaintiffs.
3. Defendants 1 and 2 obtained documents to the effect that the plaintiffs are indebted to another Bank - Kaitharam Service Co-operative Bank. The plaintiffs on the other hand contend that the liability O.P (C) No.1314/2014 2 has been discharged and that no amount is due to the said Bank. That is a matter to be considered in the suit in determining as to who has committed breach of contract. It is in order to produce the document obtained under the Right to Information Act and lead evidence in that regard did the defendants 1 and 2 file an application to re-open the evidence.
4. The court below was unjustified in dismissing the application to re-open the evidence on the ground of mere delay. Any delay on that count could have been condoned by directing defendants 1 and 2 to pay costs. I am inclined to afford an opportunity to defendants 1 and 2 to adduce evidence on the financial capacity of the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs on the basis of the documents now received. Accordingly Ext.P8 order is set aside and I.A.Nos.1323/2013, 1324/2013 and 1325/2013 in O.S.No.401/2010 are allowed.
5. The above is of course subject to the condition that defendants 1 and 2 pay a sum of ` 10,000/- as costs to Mr.Sabu George, counsel for the plaintiffs. The costs shall be paid within three weeks O.P (C) No.1314/2014 3 from today failing which the impugned order will remain in-tact.
The Original Petition is allowed.
nj.
Sd/- V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.