PADAM SINGH Vs. DEVI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri B.D. Pandey, holding brief of Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for defendantappellant and Ms. Rama Goel Bansal, learned counsel for plaintiffrespondent No. 1.

(2.) A registered agreement for sale dtd. 3/12/1993 was executed in respect of agricultural land covered by Gata Nos. 547 and 574, measured differently, in between the plaintiff and the defendant. The period for executing the saledeed was agreed upon as one year from the date of agreement. After the said period expired, another registered agreement dtd. 6/12/1994 was executed in respect of the same property and, thereby too, the defendant agreed to sell the same in favour of the plaintiff, but when the latter did not adhere to the terms of the agreement and, despite notice issued by the plaintiff, saledeed was not executed by the defendant, Original Suit No. 324 of 1996 was instituted by respondent No. 1 claiming a decree for specific performance of registered agreement(s) with an alternative relief of refund of earnest money with interest.

(3.) The defence of defendant No. 1 (appellant) was that the agreement was not executed for selling the property, but it was a transaction of loan and a sum of Rs.41,000.00 was given as loan amount to him, but the plaintiff fraudulently got the said agreement executed as an agreement for sale.