ANKIT GUPTA Vs. BADRILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parties through their counsel.

(2.) The present petition has been filed under article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 13-03-2010 passed by the 17th AJD Indore in Civil Suit No. 106-A/2013.

(3.) The facts of the case reveal that the respondents No.2 and 3 who are infact the title holder of the property have entered into an agreement of sale dated 28-02-2006 with respondent No.1 Badrilal. Badrilal in turn though no sale deed was executed in his favour has entered into a second agreement on 28-02-2006 with the present petitioner, who is the plaintiff again for sale of land. Meaning thereby, Badrilal on the strength of the agreement to sale dated 28-02-2006 has entered into the agreement to sale on 28-02-2006. He has preferred a civil suit for specific performance of contract on the strength of the agreement dated 28-02-2006 and in the civil suit an application was preferred by the present petitioner who is plaintiff u/s 65 of the Evidence Act. The defendants as they were not having a copy of the agreement did not produce the same and the trial court has finally after hearing the parties at length has dismissed the application preferred u/s 65 of the Evidence Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment delivered in the case of N.S. Prakash Rao Vs. Balal Krishna and another passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Civil Revision No. 2008/2007 dated 18-07-2007 and the order passed by the Hon'ble apex court in the case of Rakesh Mohindra Vs. Anita Beri and others in Civil Appeal No. 13361 of 2015 dated 06-11-2015 . This court has carefully gone through the aforesaid judgments.