PARMANAND Vs. BAJRANG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The appellant/plaintiff filed a suit seeking specific performance of the agreement dated Ist June, 1991 executed by respondent No. 1 in his favour in respect of agricultural lands. Respondent No. 2 was impleaded in the suit as a pro forma defendant. The execution of the agreement was admitted by respondent No. 1. The suit was, however, resisted on the plea that the said agreement was not intended to be a real agreement for sale as it was executed only as a security for the loan advanced by the appellant to respondent No. 1. On the pleadings of parties the trial Court framed the following issues.

(3.) Defendant No. 1 did not produce any evidence before the trial Court. His prayer for grant of adjournment to adduce evidence was declined by the trial Court and the case was closed after recording the statement of the plaintiff and his witnesses. The trial Court on appreciation of evidence decreed the suit.