LAWS(SC)-1972-11-4

DWARKA PRASAD SINGH Vs. HARIKANT PRASAD SINGH

Decided On November 29, 1972
DWARKA PRASAD SINGH Appellant
V/S
HARIKANT PRASAD SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Patna High Court in a suit for specific performance of a contract for sale of certain properties described in Schedule 1 of the plaint.

(2.) The facts to the extent they are material may be stated. The suit which was filed by Babu Thakur Prasad Singh and others in 1943 was on the basis of a contract for sale made in 1931 by Saroda Charan Guha (deceased) defendant First Party in the suit and Babu Ambika Prasad Singh and others-defendants second Party to whom defendant first party had actually sold the properties in dispute. It was alleged, inter alia, in the plaint that the total sale consideration was Rupees 99,995/-. Out of that sum, Rupees 23,000/- had already been paid to defendant first party. It was further stated that defendant second party in spite of full knowledge of the agreement between the plaintiffs and the defendant first party purchased the suit properties for Rupees 1,63,400/- by means of deed of sale dated December 11, 1942. Among the reliefs which were prayed for were for a decree for specific performance being passed in favour of the plaintiffs against the defendants on payment of a sum of Rupees 55,306.25 paise or such other amount as the Court might determine and if, for any reason, such a decree be not granted a decree for a sum of Rupees 44,688/- with interest at 6% from the date of the suit till the date of realisation be passed against defendant first party.

(3.) A written statement was filed on behalf of the defendant first party. Therein he admitted receipt of a sum of Rupees 15,000/- only by way of payment as earnest money or part consideration. The defence of defendants second party was that being bona fide purchaser for value and having paid full consideration in good faith and without notice of the alleged contract of sale set up by the plaintiffs the suit was liable to be dismissed. The trial Court decided the suit by a judgment dated October 10, 1947. Out of the issues framed on the pleadings of the parties the following need be mentioned :