PIROJI Vs. NANDKUMAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No. 3 in O.S. No. 75/2006 has preferred this second appeal, assailing judgment and decree passed in R.A. No. 68/2009 dated 06.01.2014 by I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad sitting at Hubli, confirming judgment and decree dated 27.02.2009 passed in O.S. No. 75/2006 by Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Hubli.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred to, in terms of their status before the trial Court.

(3.) First respondent - plaintiff instituted O.S. No. 75/2006 for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 05.08.2003 in respect of suit schedule property. According to plaintiff, suit schedule property is an agricultural land bearing Block No. 163/3 measuring 2 acres 26 guntas situated at Devara Gudihal village, Hubli. Defendant No. 1 had agreed to sell the property to plaintiff for a valuable consideration of Rs. 3,00,000/ - and had accepted advance sale consideration of Rs. 2,00,000/ -. The balance sale consideration of Rs. 1,00,000/ - was to be paid at the time of registration of sale deed. That the entire transaction was to be completed within a period of six months from 05.08.2003. Plaintiff, thereafter, requested defendant on several occasions to execute a regular sale deed by accepting balance sale consideration. He contended that he was ready and willing to perform his part of contract. But, to the shock and surprise of plaintiff, defendant No. 1 suppressing certain facts to plaintiff, had executed a sale deed dated 28.02.2005 (for a sum of Rs. 1,79,000/ -) in favour of defendant No. 2. This fact came to the knowledge of plaintiff in February 2006. After obtaining copy of sale deed executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of defendant No. 2, plaintiff instituted suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 05.08.2003.