SURENDRA KUMAR GUPTA Vs. NARAYAN RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Pro-cedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC'), the appel-lants have challenged the legality and pro-priety of the judgment and decree dated 19-4-1991 passed by the 2nd Additional Dis-trict Judge, Ambikapur, in Civil Appeal No. 14A/85, affirming the judgment and decree of dismissal of civil suit passed by the 2nd Civil Judge Class-II, Ambikapur, in Civil Suit No. 97A/79 dated 29-3-82.

(2.) The present appeal has been admitted for consideration on the following substan-tial questions of law;

(3.) As per allegation made in the plaint, original defendant No. 1 Narayan Ram en-tered into agreement for sale of his land bear-ing khasra No. 1442 area 0.07 acres situated at Ambikapur with plaintiffs Surendra Kumar Gupta, Virendra Kumar Gupta and Baijnath Prasad Gupta. His mother Indiya Devi also co-operated in execution of such agreement. Out of sale amount of Rs. 1400/-, Rs. 421/-was paid to Narayan Ram at the time of ex-ecution of the agreement. Possession was im-mediately delivered by Narayan Ram to the plaintiffs. Narayan Ram further received Rs. 783/- installments and executed the receipt from the back of said agreement. After Oc-tober, 1971, Narayan Ram and his mother Indiya Devi left Ambikapur, their address was not known to the plaintiffs. Subse-quently, mother of Narayan Ram, Indiya Devi died. Thereafter, the plaintiffs came to know that Narayan Ram was residing at Bhopal. The plaintiffs contracted with Narayan Ram at Bhopal and requested for execution of sale deed but Narayan Ram denied the perfor-mance of his part of contract. On 16-1-1979 Narayan Ram tried to dispossess the plain-tiffs from the suit land. On that day, they have informed that Narayan Ram has sold the land to other defendant Gendaram. In these cir-cumstances, suit for specific performance was filed by the plaintiffs along with claim of permanent injunction. By filing written statements, original respondents/defendants have denied the adverse allegation made in the plaint and have alleged that Narayan Ram has not entered into agreement for sale of his land to the plaintiffs. Original defendant No. 2 Gendaram has purchased the land from Narayan Ram and Gendaram is a bona fide purchaser.