UMASHANKER SAHU Vs. SONSAI SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 4-7-1996 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Surajpur, in Civil Suit No. 27- A/92 whereby the suit for specific performance of the contract, has been decreed.

(2.) Appellant and respondent entered into an agreement on 10-2-1989 for sale of land bearing Khasra No. 926/1 area O. 20 decimal @ Rs. 1050/- (Rupees one thousand fifty) per decimal and the appellant received an advance of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) towards this agreement. There was a condition that the appellant after demarcating the land shall execute a registered sale deed for the land available there up to the extent of O. 20 decimal @ Rs. 1050/- (Rupees One thousand and fifty). But, the appellant neither got the suit land demarcated nor executed the sale deed; despite several attempts made by the respondent to get the sale deed executed. Ultimately, the respondent served a registered notice demanding execution of registered sale deed after demarcation of the suit land. Instead of performing the remaining part of contract, i.e., demarcation of land and execution of sale deed, replied that he is ready to sell the land @ Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand). Hence, the respondent filed a civil suit for specific performance of contract and in alternative for refund of advance with interest @ 18%.

(3.) Appellant denied the claim and pleaded that the value of land was not finalized. No amount was received by him. As per agreement, the identity of land has not been mentioned. The value was to be determined after demarcation of the land. The liability for demarcation was rested on the respondent. Respondent neither got the suit land demarcated for two years nor was anxious to purchase the same. When notice was served on him, he replied that if the respondent is willing to purchase the land described in agreement he can sell the same at the prevailing rate within one month, but the respondent did not take any interest towards it. As the respondent has not complied with the terms and condition of agreement, therefore, he is responsible for breach of contract. Set apart, the suit land is coparcenary joint property of Hindu Undivided Family belonging to appellant and other members of appellant's family.