SHIVALI ENTERPRISES Vs. GODAWARI (DECEASED)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals challenge the judgment dtd. 3/3/2008 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Regular Second Appeal Nos. 1206 and 1207 of 2005, thereby allowing the appeals filed by the respondents-defendants challenging the concurrent judgments and decrees dtd. 3/1/2001 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Faridabad (hereinafter referred to as the "trial court") in RBT 329/90/2000, and 8/2/2005 passed by the learned District Judge, Faridabad (hereinafter referred to as the "Appellate Court") in Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2001. Vide the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge of the High Court directed that, if the plaintiff desires to get the sale deed executed pursuant to the agreement(s) to sell, he would do so by paying the present prevalent market value as sale consideration. The appellant-plaintiff has also assailed the order dtd. 10/4/2008 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court, thereby dismissing the review applications being R.A. No. 19-C of 2008 in R.S.A. No. 1206 of 2005 and R.A. No. 18-C of 2008 in R.S.A. No. 1207 of 2005, filed by the appellant-plaintiff.

(2.) Facts in brief giving rise to the present appeals are as under:

(3.) Due to a dispute between the State of U.P. and Haryana, the aforesaid sale deed could not be executed in favour of the appellant-plaintiff. Therefore, another agreement to sell was executed between the parties on 23/8/1985. At the time of execution of the said agreement, an additional amount of Rs.1,00,000.00 was paid by the appellant-plaintiff to the respondents-defendants. It is not in dispute that the total amount payable as per the terms of the agreement to sell dtd. 29/10/1983 was Rs.1,65,000.00 out of which, an amount of Rs.1,50,000.00 was duly received by the respondents-defendants on or before 23/8/1985. As per the terms of the agreement(s) to sell, the remaining sale price was to be paid before the SubRegistrar at the time of execution and registration of sale deed. It is not in dispute that the physical possession of the suit property was also delivered to the appellant-plaintiff by the respondents-defendants at the time of execution of the agreement(s) to sell. It is also not in dispute that the appellant-plaintiff is thereafter in continuous possession of the suit property.