51. As per the evidence available on record, the plaintiff in O.S. No.147 of 1992 is living with her husband, father of PW.1 but they are not maintaining any individual accounts. In the cross-examination, PW.1 admitted that there is no evidence with the plaintiffs that balance sale consideration amount of Rs.5,30,000/- was deposited in any Bank in the accounts of his mother and wife and no such amount was available in the bank account of PW.1 prior to 31.08.1991 and that his mother had no independent source of income to acquire the suit schedule property but his wife is having independent source of income being a practicing doctor (gynecologist). It is not the case of the defendant, at any stage, that Venkayamma, plaintiff in O.S. No.147 of 1992, purchased the property for herself; on the other hand, it is the specific contention of the defendant that PW.1 purchased the property in the names of his mother Venkayamma and his wife Dr. Sailaja, plaintiffs in the suits, due to taxation problems. Thus, the real purchaser is PW.1 and not Venkayamma, therefore, proof of source of income by PW.1 to pay balance of sale consideration is sufficient and failure to prove the independent source of income of Venkayamma is not a ground to disbelieve readiness and willingness pleaded by the plaintiff in O.S. No.147 of 1992. Apart from that, Venkayamma and her husband are living together, they possessed land, raising tobacco crop and PW.1 produced Exs.A-13 to A-28 to prove that his father own land at Annangi village. Exs.A-13 and A-14 are the pattedar passbooks; Exs.A-15 to A-28 are the sale notices issued to Venkateswarlu, father of PW.1, husband of Venkayamma, plaintiff in O.S. No.147 of 1992. All these documents would go to establish that the husband of the plaintiff in O.S. No.147 of 1992 has independent source of income and when Venkayamma and Venkateswarlu are living together, from the source of income of her husband she can meet the requirements to pay balance of sale consideration under Ex.A-1.
