First Appeal — Specific Performance — Agreement to sell dated 17.10.2010 (Ex.P/1) for suit land at Raigarh at Rs.438/- per sq.ft.; Rs.10,00,000/- earnest money received by defendant No.1; sale deed to be executed by 15.01.2011 — Trial Court (1st Additional District Judge, Raigarh, judgment and decree dated 05.12.2018 in Civil Suit No.12-A/2014) held the agreement duly executed and the advance received (Issue Nos.1 and 2 in plaintiff's favour) but dismissed the suit as time barred and for failure to prove readiness and willingness — Held, dismissing the plaintiff's appeal: the plaintiff neither appeared at trial nor filed any document showing her financial position/capacity to pay; her first notice was issued only on 14.10.2013, nearly three years after the agreement, and its delivery was not proved by courier receipt/acknowledgment; the date '15.01.2011' in Ex.P/1 bore whitener and different ink without the defendant's initials, and the overwriting was not proved to be with his consent; the suit filed on 13.01.2014 was prima facie time barred; no relief is available in a time-barred suit, including refund of earnest money; no illegality or perversity in the impugned judgment and decree. Relied on: Janki Vishdeo Bhojwani v. Indusind Bank Ltd., (2005) 2 SCC 217 (a power-of-attorney holder cannot depose to the principal's personal knowledge); R. Shama Naik v. Srinivasiah, [2024 INSC 927] (readiness denotes capacity including financial position; willingness relates to conduct).
