VISHNU JAKHU PATHADE Vs. BAIKU TULSIRAM MOCHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiffs second appeal, who brought a suit for possession of an agricultural land and was unsuccessful in both the Court below.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff was that he is the owner of the suit land. He orally agreed to sell it to the defendants for Rs. 3,210/-. That agreement was made on 30th June, 1958. The plaintiff received Rs. 2,400/- from the defendants as part payment of the consideration. The defendants were pure in possession of the land. The defendants were to obtain permission from the Collector within six months for the sale. The balance amount of Rs. 810/- of the consideration was to be paid at the time of the registration of the sale deed. The defendants, however, did not seek permission of the Collector and thus committed a breach of the contract. The contract had, therefore, come to an end. The plaintiff issued a notice dated 31st May, 1965 to the defendants to hand over possession of the land to him. The defendants refused to do so. Hence the suit.

(3.) The defence taken by the defendants was that the contract was not oral, but it was in writing. It was made on 29th June, 1958. The defendants paid Rs. 2,400/- to the plaintiff on that date and the plaintiff issued an earnest receipt dated 29th June, 1958. They denied that it was the responsibility of the defendants to obtain permission of the collector for the sale and contended that the responsibility in this behalf was of the plaintiff. They denied that the contract stood cancelled or that the plaintiff was entitled to rescind it. The main defence of the defendants was that their possession was protected under section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act and hence, the plaintiff was not entitled to the relief of possession.