(1.) This appeal by special leave is by the defendant No. 1questioning the correctness of the appellate judgment of the Delhi High Court.
(2.) The plaintiff-respondent No. 1 sued for a declaration that the agreement dated April 14, 1961, Exhibit D-1 entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 1 for sale of 52 bighas of land was not binding and was null and void as being opposed to the provisions of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 ('Act' for short). Plaintiff had pleaded that defendant No. 1 had served a notice on November 23, 1962, on him as also defendants 2-4 his co-sharers, demanding execution of the sale-deed and that provided the cause of action for institution of the suit. Present appellant as defendant No. 1 entered contest in the suit and maintained that the agreement was a valid one and was enforceable. According to him the suit was not maintainable being hit by S. 42 of the Specific Relief Act. The learned trial Judge dismissed the suit. On appeal the Additional Senior Subordinate Judge affirmed the dismissal. In second appeal the High Court reversed the judgments and decrees of the two courts below by holding that the agreement was hit by the Act inasmuch as the purpose for which the property was being purchased was non-agricultural and would be opposed to the provisions of the Act. Defendant No. 1 has assailed the reversing decree of the High Court in this appeal.
(3.) On a true construction of S. 23 of the Act the fate of this appeal depends. That section provides: