BHAIYALAL Vs. RAM DIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is to plaintiffs second appeal arising out of a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell the property said to have been executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. The trial Court had decreed the suit. On appeal the learned District Judge reversed the decree of the trial Court and dismissed the suit.

(2.) Shortly stated, the plaint case was that on 14-4-69 he hold the house belonging to him in favour of the defendant for a sum of Rs. 4,000/- under a sale deed executed by the former in favour of the defendant. The same day, the defendant executed an agreement to resale in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the said house. According to the terms set out in that agreement, the defendant was to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff within two years, i.e. by 13-4-71 for the same amount, namely Rs. 4,000/-. Yet another document was executed by the plaintiff in the shape of rent note in favour of the defendant, the rent fixed thereunder being Rs. 30/- per month payable by the 14th of each succeeding month. The plaintiff was ready and wiling to perform his part of the contract at all material times but the defendant declined to retransfer the property and hence the suit.

(3.) The defence set up by the respondent was that he had not executed the deed of agreement for the retransfer of the property in favour of the plaintiff on the basis of which the suit has been filed. He had executed another document which has not been filed by the plaintiffs. That document incorporated an agreement of resale in favour of the plaintiff within 8 months. It is not necessary to set out the other pleas taken in defence.