GANGA SINGH Vs. SANTOSH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's second appeal against concurrent decisions of the courts below dismissing their suit for the specific performance of a contract for the reconveyance of certain plots of land to them. The original parties to the contract are not principal parties in the suit and it is, therefore, necessary to relate the facts of the case in some detail. On 22-1-1936 the plaintiffs' ancestors Chaudhry Madho Singh and Chaudhry Kanwaj Singh entered into a transaction of sale and agreement to resell by means of two registered documents with four persons, Tola Ram, Gangi Mak, Ram Chandra and Snyamlal. By the first deed Madho Singh and Kanwal Singh sold certain plots of land to the vendees for Rs. 2500/- and by the second the vendees agreed to reconvey the same property to the vendors on condition that they received back the sale price within ten years. The four vendees are relations, Ram Chandra and Shyam Lal being brothers and the other two their uncles. Shyam Lal being a minor the agreement to re-sell was signed by Ram Chandra on behalf of both. Tota Ram did not sign the agreement which was executed on his behalf by his son Pyare Lal. Gangi Mal executed it on his own behalf. Both documents were registered on the same day between the hours of noon and 1 p.m. The sale deed bears the serial No. 106 and the agreement of reconveyance No. 107 in the office of the Registrar. The option to re-purchase the property was given to vendors or their heirs, and it was also stipulated that the obligation to re-transfer the property bound the purchasers as well as their heirs.

(2.) On 1-2-1937 one Misri Lal filed a suit for pre-emption. in the court of Munsif, Bulandshahr. The suit was decreecf and the decree was ultimately confirmed by the High Court in second appeal with some modifications with regard to the sale price. The decree of this Court referred to the agreement for re-sale at some length, (the Importance of this fact will become clear presently). After the decree for preemption, mutation was effected in favour of the preemptors. The mutation order of the Revenue Court referred to the sale deed and the agreement for repurchase. After acquiring the property, the preemptor Misri Lal sold about half of it to two persons, Shishpal Singh and. Bhura Singh.

(3.) On 18-1-1946 the present suit to enforce the agreement for re-sale was filed by the plaintiffs Ganga Singn and Balbir Singh who are the heirs of the original vendors of 1936. The principal defendants are Misri Lal the pre-emptor and his two transferees Shishpal Singh and Bhura Singh. The pro forma defendants are the tour original purchasers of the property, Tota Ram, Ganga Mal, Ram Chander and Shyam Lal. They have not contested the suit.