Specific performance limited to vendor's undivided half share where buyers knew the true title and estoppel failed.

Specific performance could extend only to the vendor's undivided half share where the agreement to sell was executed through a power of attorney holder and the plaintiffs knew the property had devolved in equal shares. On those facts, no estoppel arose because the plaintiffs were not misled into believing that the entire property belonged exclusively to the vendor. The decree was therefore confined to the deceased vendor's 50% share, while defendant No.1's separate share was excluded. The concurrent findings on execution, consideration, and limitation were left undisturbed, but the decree was modified to reflect the true extent of title.

---

---

Issues: Whether the decree for specific performance could extend to the defendant's undivided half share in the suit property, and whether the plea of estoppel could bind that share despite the plaintiffs' knowledge of the true title.

Analysis: The agreement to sell was executed by the vendor through a power of attorney holder and described the vendor as late K. Basavaraja Urs. The evidence showed that the plaintiffs were aware that the property had devolved in equal shares and that defendant No.1 had an independent interest in it. In such circumstances, there was no basis to infer that the plaintiffs were misled into believing that the entire property belonged exclusively to the vendor, and the plea of estoppel was not made out. The agreement, therefore, could bind only the share of the deceased vendor and not the separate share of defendant No.1. The concurrent findings on execution of the agreement, receipt of consideration, and limitation were left undisturbed, but the decree required modification to reflect the true extent of the vendor's interest.

Conclusion: The decree for specific performance was upheld only to the extent of 50% share of late K. Basavaraja Urs and was set aside for the remaining 50% share of defendant No.1; the plaintiffs were entitled only to half share in the suit property.

---