KRISHNA BAHADUR LAL SHRIVASTAVA Vs. SUNIL KUMAR ARORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dtd. 12/2/2019 passed by Fourth Additional District Judge, Durg (C.G) in Civil Suit No.1236102-A/2012 whereby the suit filed by the plaintiffs for specific performance of contract and permanent injunction has been rejected. Hence this appeal.

(2.) (a) The case of the plaintiffs, in short, is that the land bearing Kh. No.289/2 admeasuring 3.52 hectares situated at village Karhidih, P.H. No. 17/8, Tahsil and District Durg was jointly owned by defendants 1 to 3. According to plaint averments, since 1980-81 the family of the plaintiffs and defendants were jointly doing the land business, however, the purchase of lands was made in separate names and subsequently as the lands were being sold, the sale consideration was being divided equally. The plaintiff further stated that in the year 1999, the lands which were jointly purchased were agreed to be divided which was accepted by the defendants and accordingly, some of the lands belonging to the plaintiffs situated at village Sankra, Distt. Rajnandgaon were sold in favour of the defendants in 2003-04 by registered sale deed. Like wise, the landed property of village Jhenjhri were adjacent to the land of Karhidih with the same boarder which was purchased by the plaintiffs and defendants and therefore, in respect of the property of Jhenjhri and Karidih, it was agreed that the defendants would sell it for Rs.22,58,500.00 and an oral agreement was arrived at between the parties. Pursuant to such agreement, on 11/1/2008 a total of 10 stamp papers worth Rs.3,74,300.00 was purchased, out of which 5 stamp papers of Rs.1,84,600.00 were used for execution of registered sale deed on 28/1/2008 and 30/1/2008 in respect of property of village Jhenjhri thereby the sale was done to the plaintiffs in part.

(3.) (a) The defendants denied all the adverse allegations as also the offer and acceptance as alleged by the plaintiffs in respect of distribution and sale of property inter-se was categorically denied. It was further stated that the plaintiffs have fabricated the so-called arrangements without acceptance of offer and the plaintiffs would themselves be held to be liable for the acceptance. The defendants further asserted that plaintiff no.1 used to look after the properties of defendants and he agreed to purchase the same and since they were residing at a far place i.e., Bhopal, they were not able to frequently come to Durg, as such, on obtaining nominal amount, the property of village Jhenjhri was sold to the plaintiffs and the land of Karhidih was neither offered for sale nor any agreement was arrived at. The payment of sale consideration of Rs.10.00 lakhs was also denied.