NURUL HUDA LASKAR Vs. TAYAJUNNESSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second appeal has been preferred by the defendant against the concurrent findings of the learned courts below. The plaintiffs instituted Title suit No. 118 of 1994 claiming decree of specific performance stating that on 05.02.1994, the defendant and his mother executed a registered agreement in favour of the plaintiffs for sale of a plot of land measuring 2 Kathas 8 Chataks on consideration of Rs. 27, 000/ - and received a sum of Rs. 26,000/ - at the time of execution of the agreement for sale. The mother of the defendant Mojarunnessa, who executed the document, died subsequently on 17.04.1994 after permission for sale was granted by the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner. Thereafter, again, permission for sale was obtained on 13.06.1994 and 20.07.1994, but even thereafter the defendant was asked to execute sale deed by offering a balance sum of Rs.1000/ -, the defendant avoided. According to the plaintiff, being compelled under the aforesaid circumstances they had to pray for a decree from the Court for specific performance of the agreement for sale. It was pleaded that the plaintiffs were ready and willing to perform their part of the agreement.

(2.) Appearing in the case, the sole defendant took a stand that the agreement for sale was never executed by him or by his mother. The defendant pleaded that some signed papers were handed over to the plaintiffs for the purpose of preparation of compromise petition in connection with a proceeding under Section 144 C.P.C. between the parties but the plaintiffs fraudulently converted the said signed papers into an agreement for sale and fraudulently got the same registered in the Court of Sub Registrar at Silchar. The defendants, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the suit.

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid pleading of the parties the learned trial court framed as many as 6 issues. Issue Nos.2 and 3 of the said issues are most relevant among all and they are quoted below: - "2 Did the defendant and his mother execute a registered bainapatra on 05.02.1994 to sell the suit land at a consideration price of Rs. 27,000/ - and received a sum of Rs. 26,000/ - as advance? 3. Did the defendant obtain sale permission dated 02.04.1994 to sell the suit land to the plaintiff -