RAM DAS Vs. RAM REKHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a second appeal arising out of a suit, being suit No.1478 of 1091 (Smt. Ram Rekha v. Ram Das) for specific performance of contract. The facts of the case are that appellant Ram Das agreed to transfer, the suit land by sale in favour of plaintiff-respondent Smt. Ram Rekha for the consideration of Rs.12000-. An agreement of sale was executed and presented for registration before the concerned Sub-Registrar on 25-2-1982 and it was registered on 23-4-1982, the defendant-appellant had received a sum of Rs.500.00 from the plaintiff- respondent towards sale consideration prior to execution, of the sale-agreement and a further sum of Rs.5,500.00 was actually paid to him before the Sub-Registrar on the date on which the agreement was executed and presented for registration. The suit land being admittedly situate in the Urban Agglomeration of Gorakhpur, it was provided in the agreement that if the Vendor failed to execute the sale deed within a period of three months of the grant of permission for sale by the Competent Authority (Urban Land Ceiling), the Vendee would be at liberty to file a suit for specific performance of the contract.

(2.) The Vendee Smt. Ram Rekha Devi filed the suit giving rise to this appeal with the allegation that a total sum of Rs.5910.00 was further paid to the Vendor on different dates between 24-4-1983 and 31-12-1989 (both dates inclusive) and that only a sum of Rs.90.00 was left to be paid to the Vendor, but he failed to even move application before the Competent Authority (Urban Land Ceiling) for permission to sell the land in suit as per agreement. It was also alleged that the plaintiff was ready and willing to purchase the land from the defendant on payment of the remaining sale consideration and to perform her part of contract, but the defendant was loathe to execute the sale deed. The defendant-appellant admitted the receipt of Rs.6000.00 as earnest money from the plaintiff, but denied having received a further sum of Rs.5,910.00 towards the sale consideration alleged to have been paid to him by the plaintiff in different sums on different dates. He contested the suit inter alia on the ground that permission for sale applied for, was not given by the Competent Authority, (Urban Land Ceiling) and consequently, the contract stood frustrated and became unenforceable in law. Bar of Sections 16 and 20 of Specific Relief Act was also pleaded by the defendant-appellant.

(3.) It may be observed that a suit, being suit No. 942 of 1991 (Ram Das v. Smt. Ram Rekha) had already been filed by the defendant-appellant for declaration that the sale agreement had become unenforceable in law in absence of the permission by the Competent Authority (Urban Land Ceiling). Both the suits were lumped together and decided by a common judgment dated 13-4-1992. The learned Munsif decreed the suit giving rise to this appeal and dismissed the one filed by the appellant for declaration that the sale agreement had become ineffective and unenforceable in law owing to refusal by the Competent Authority (urban Land Ceiling) to grant permission for sale.