SAUDAN SINGH Vs. GOSWAMI RASIKANAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendant's second appeal arising out of a decree for specific performance by which the appellant has been directed to execute a sale deed of certain agricultural plots in favour of the plaintiff.

(2.) THE facts which are no longer in dispute in this second appeal are that on the 27th of November, 1954, the defendant executed document Ex. 1 which purports to be a sale deed of the plots in suit in plaintiff's favour for a sum of Rs 100.00. This document was never presented for registration and, on the 27th of November, 1957, the plaintiff instituted the suit giving rise to this appeal relying upon the aforesaid document as an agreement by the defendant to sell the plots in suit to the plaintiff. Plaintiff's allegation was that in spite of repeated requests from the plaintiff, the defendant did not bring about a conveyance of the property covered by the aforesaid document, even though the plaintiff had been in actual possession of the plots in suit.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the defendant-appellant has raised two contentions. The first is that document Ex. 1 cannot itself be treated as an agreement of sale and, in view of the absence of any allegation of the plaintiff that any agreement of sale took place, the plaintiff was not entitled to a decree for specific performance. The second contention raised by learned counsel is that, in any case, specific performance being a relief in the discretion of a court, it should not have been granted to the plaintiff in the facts and circumstances of the present case.