SATISH KUMAR Vs. KARAN SINGH & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular First Appeal under Sec. 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 impugns the judgment of the Trial Court dated 16.3.2010 by which the Trial Court decreed the suit for specific performance filed by the respondent No. 1/plaintiff.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the respondent No. 1/plaintiff entered into an agreement to sell with the original defendant/Sh. Jaishi, who has since expired and is now represented by his legal heirs, and who are the appellants in this appeal. The agreement to sell dated 6.1.1995 is in the form of a receipt -cum -agreement. The total sale consideration was Rs. 4,60,000/ - and out of which a sum of Rs.2,30,000/ - was paid on the date the agreement to sell was entered into. This aspect of receipt of Rs. 2,30,000/ - is duly recorded in the agreement dated 6.1.1995. The respondent/plaintiff further paid a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/ - to the original defendant/Jaishi/proposed seller through his son -Mahavir Singh on 1.2.1996. Therefore, a total sum of Rs. 4,30,000/ - out of the total consideration of Rs. 4,60,000/ - was paid to the seller Sh. Jaishi. It is alleged that since Sh. Jaishi wanted to wriggle out of the agreement to sell, a legal notice dated 13.7.1996 was sent on behalf of the respondent/plaintiff to him, and ultimately the subject suit for specific performance came to be filed. The basic defence of Sh. Jaishi in the written statement filed by him was that the agreement to sell dated 6.1.1995 was void because signatures on the same were obtained by the respondent/plaintiff in collusion with one of his son Sh. J.N. Sehrawat.

(3.) After the pleadings were complete, the Trial Court framed the following issues: