ABDUL SAMI QURASHI Vs. SARDAR KULDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DILIP Gupta, J. The plaintiffs have filed this Second Appeal for setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Agra by which the Civil Appeal that had been filed by them was dismissed.

(2.) THE plea that had been taken in the Original Suit was the usual plea that has time and again engaged the attention of the Courts. It was alleged that the deed dated 12th July, 1956 (Ext. 2, Paper No. 31-C) was an ostensible sale deed that had been executed by Haji Abdul Sattar in favour of Bhorey Ram Lal only for the purposes of securing the loan of Rs. 30,000that he had taken from Bhorey Ram Lal and that Bhorey Ram Lal had also executed a separate agreement dated 12th July, 1956 (Ext. 1, Paper No. I4-C) to reconvey the said property in favour of Haji Abdul Sattar within 20 years on certain terms and conditions; that Haji Abdul Sattar died on 29th October, 1958 leaving behind the plaintiffs and proforma defendants as the legal heirs and representatives who were entitled to get the suit property reconveyed in their favour but after the death of Bhorey Ram Lal, his heirs executed a sale deed in December, 1958 in favour of Sardar Kuldeep Singh and Gurdeep Singh (defendant Nos. 1 and 2); that the plaintiffs and the proforma defendants had been requesting defendant Nos. 1 and 2 to reconvey the property in their favour but that was not done and in fact defendant Nos. 1 and 2 even filed suits for cancellation of the reconveyance deed which were ultimately dismissed and that the plaintiffs and the proforma defendants had always been and were ready and willing to perform their part of the contract but defendant Nos. 1 and 2 were not ready to perform their part of the contract. Ultimately, after serving the registered notice dated 13th October, 1977 upon defendant Nos. 1 and 2, the suit was filed for specific performance of the reconveyance contract executed on dated 12th July, 1956 by Bhorey Ram Lal in favour of Haji Abdul Sattar.

(3.) THE Trial Court recorded a finding that the sale deed that had been executed by Haji Abdul Sattar in favour of Bhorey Ram Lal for a consideration of Rs. 30. 000 was not for securing the alleged loan; that the reconveyance deed had been executed for Rs. 30. 000 and not Rs. 3000; that the term of the agreement of reconveyance under which Abdul Sattar was required to pay Rs. 120 per annum continuously to Bhorey Ram Lal towards the repairs of the property had not been complied with; that the condition of payment of Rs. 120 per annum towards repairs was not void and that the plaintiffs had neither been and nor were ready and willing to perform their part of the contract and that the notice dated 13th October, 1977 was given by the plaintiffs for execution of the reconveyance deed after the expiry of 20 years period stipulated in the agreement. THE plaintiffs were, therefore, held not entitled to any relief of specific performance of contract and the suit was dismissed.