RAMKARAN Vs. JAGDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sah Om Prakash Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Raj Kumar Kesari, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) This is the second appeal arising out of the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court dated 10.2017 and 22017 passed in Civil Appeal No. 52 of 2015 (Ramkaran v. Jagdeep Singh) upholding the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 30.11.2015 and 11.12015 passed in Original Suit No. 264 of 2004 (Jagdeep Singh v. Ramkaran).

(3.) The plaintiff filed original suit no.264 of 2004 for a direction to the defendant appellant to execute the sale deed in respect of the land in question in pursuance of the agreement of sale dated 04.08.2003 entered into between the defendant and the plaintiff. The case of the plaintiff was that an agreement of sale was executed on 04.08.2003 duly registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar in respect of the land in question on payment of Rs.2,00,000/- to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant. The rent of the land situated in Village-Laalpur, Post and Tehsil-Hapur, District-Ghaziabad was stated to be Rs.22.60. This Khasra no.61, area 0.672 hectares was stated to be mortgaged by the plaintiff for purposes of purchasing a tractor which was informed by the plaintiff to the defendant. The agreement was valid for a period of 11 months up to 7.2004 and during this period the defendant was required to prepare all the papers in respect of the land in question. According to the plaintiff he told the defendant several times to get the papers prepared and get the sale deed registered but the defendant kept avoiding the issue. The plaintiff gave two notices through his counsel Sri Moolchand Sharma, Advocate Hapur by registered post to the defendant on 4.06.2004 and 18.06.2004 but it was declined to be accepted by the defendant. The case of the plaintiff was that he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract but the same was being avoided by the defendant. Thereupon, the plaintiff informed the defendant that he is going to the Sub- Registrar Office, Hapur for execution of the sale deed but the defendant again avoided the issue. Again on 12.07.2004, the plaintiff gave the notice to the defendant through his counsel Sri Ranbir Singh Kashyap, Advocate, Hapur requiring the defendant to come to the office of Sub- Registrar, Hapur on 30.07.2004 to get the sale deed executed but the defendant in clear terms declined to get the sale deed executed.