VISHWANATH SINGH Vs. SHANTI KUMAR SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed under section 96 of Code of Civil procedure being aggrieved with the judgment and decree dated 17th July, 2003 passed by Second Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Ganj Basoda district Vidisha in Civil Suit No.7A of 2003.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that respondent no.1/plaintiff filed a civil suit pleading that Khilan Singh is the owner having half share in the property/land bearing Khasra No.53 area 2.874, Khasra No.196 area 4.538, Khasra No.206 area 0.941, total area 8.173 Hectares situated in village Gorkhedi Tehsil Basoda district Vidisha. He agreed to sell his share to the respondent/plaintiff for a consideration of Rs.54,000.00. The agreement was executed which was registered in Sub Registrar office Basoda and Rs.45,000.00 was paid to the Khilan Singh. It was agreed that Khilan Singh shall execute a sale deed after receiving remaining amount of Rs.9,000.00 on Miti Jeth Sudi Puno Samvat 2051. It is further pleaded that after aforesaid date,appellant /plaintiff asked Khilan Singh to execute sale deed but Khilan Singh has not executed the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. It is pleaded that the plaintiff has given a registered notice on 12.3.1996 asking Khilan Singh to receive Rs.9,000.00 and execute the sale deed. In reply, Khilan Singh denied the agreement and stated that only Rs.25,000.00 has been paid to him as loan and he has not executed the agreement to sale. Hence, civil suit has been filed. It is prayed that Khilan Singh be directed to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and also hand over possession of the land.

(3.) Defendant Khilan Singh filed written statement. It is admitted that he is having half share in the suit property but it is denied that he entered into agreement to sale the land. It is specifically pleaded that he has not executed agreement as security of loan. The plaintiff is doing Sahukari. The defendant was in the need of money, hence, he has taken Rs.25,000.00 only as loan and he has already paid interest thereupon to the plaintiff and only principle amount of Rs.25,000.00 is remained to be paid which he is ready to pay. It is further pleaded that the agreement has not been read over to me. The defendant is an illiterate villager. The cost of the land is more than Rs.2 lacs per bigha, hence, there was no reason to sale the land. Hence, it is prayed that the suit be dismissed.