TEJILAL Vs. DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a second appeal under Section 100, C.P.C. by the plaintiff. The following substantial question of law was formulated while admitting this appeal by order dated 6-4-1995:-

(2.) The facts relevant for the decision of the question referred above are that the plaintiff Tejilal was Bhumiswami of Khasara No. 109 area 2.64 acres of village Padmi. Tehsil and District Mandla. He executed the agreement dated 12-6-1979 (Ex.D-1) to sell 0.59 acre (0.239 hectare) to defendant Dayal for a consideration of Rs. 3500/-. He received an amount of Rs. 1500/- from the defendant on that date and delivered possession of this land to him. According to this agreement the registered sale-deed was to be executed on 1-5-1980 on receipt of the remaining amount of Rs. 2000/-. The plaintiff filed the suit on 18-7-1980 for possession of the land without disclosing the fact of the agreement to sell. In the written statement the defendant by way of counter-claim demanded specific performance of contract stating therein that he was and is still ready and willing to pay Rs. 2000/- towards the performance of his part of the contract. The defendant has also stated that he obtained the parcha from the Patwari regarding the details of the land and went to the office of the Sub-Registrar. Mandla and waited for the plaintiff till the evening but the plaintiff did not reach there as per agreement. He sent the notice dated 13-5-1980 to the plaintiff but he did not comply with his demand for execution and registration of the sale-deed.

(3.) The plaintiff amended his plaint by way of reply to the counter-claim and set up irrelevant pleas but he did not aver that the defendant was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. The trial Court granted the decree in favour of the defendant directing the plaintiff to execute the sale-deed in his favour on receipt of the amount of Rs. 2000/-. The first appellate Court has affirmed this decree.