KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. GURDIAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 11.9.1985, passed by the learned Courts below, vide which suit filed by the plaintiff / respondent for specific performance of an agreement of sale, was ordered to be decreed.

(2.) The plaintiff / respondent filed a suit against Smt. Bhagwanti and others, for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 12.12.1977, in respect of House No. 706/3, situated near Top Khana Gate, Patiala. The case of the plaintiff / respondent was, that Bhagwan Dass husband of Bhagwanti defendant No.1 and father of defendant Nos. 2 to 6, was the owner of house in dispute. He agreed to sell this house to the plaintiff / respondent for a consideration of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only), and executed an agreement to sell dated 12.12.1977, in favour of the plaintiff. A sum of Rs. 1,000/- ( Rupees one thousand only) was paid as earnest money. The conveyance deed was agreed to be executed after one month, of permission from guardian Court. The remaining amount of sale consideration i.e. Rs. 14,000/- (Rupees fourteen thousand only), was to be paid to Bhagwan Dass at the time of registration of the sale deed. The case of the plaintiff was, that Bhagwan Dass was competent to sell the house. That his wife Smt. Bhagwanti defendant No.1 was also sitting by his side at the time of execution of the agreement and insisted that sale deed would be executed only after getting permission of guardian Court, qua share of minor son, in spite of the stand of the plaintiff that no permission was required as Bhagwan Dass, alone was the owner of the suit property. The plaintiff / respondent issued a notice to Bhagwan Dass and his wife on 10.2.1978, under postal certificate to execute the sale deed . Sh. Bhagwan Dass lateron fell ill and died on 15.3.1978. After the death of Bhagwan Dass, the plaintiff issued another notice on 29.4.1978 under postal Certificate to defendant No.1 requesting her to execute the sale deed, in pursuance to the agreement dated 12.12.1977, executed by her husband in favour of the plaintiff / respondent.

(3.) The case of the plaintiff / respondent further was, that on coming to know that defendant No.1 was negotiating to sell the house to Krishan Kumar- defendant No.7 and his father Sarup Singh, a notice dated 1.6.1978 was issued to the plaintiff to them informing them, that there was already an agreement to sell dated 12.12.1977, executed by Bhagwan Dass in favour of the plaintiff, therefore, they could not purchase the property. The case of the plaintiff / respondent was that defendants No.1 to 4 executed the sale deed on 7.7.1978, in favour of Krishan Kumar defendant No.8. That the interest of Bhagwan Dass devolved on all his legal heirs i.e. defendants No. 1 to 6. Defendants No. 5 & 6, who were the minor daughter and son of Bhagwan Dass, had also a share in the house. Their share could not be alienated by defendant No.1 without sanction of the Court. No sanction was obtained. The sale in favour of defendant No.7, was said to be illegal and not binding on the plaintiff. It was pleaded that the plaintiff had always been ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, and was still ready and willing to do so. It was prayed, that necessary direction be issued to respondent No.1, to get the permission of guardian Court to execute the sale deed. In case such permission of the Guardian Court was required. In the alternative, it was prayed that in case relief of specific performance is not to be granted, than the plaintiff/ respondent was entitled to recover Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) paid as earnest money with another sum of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) as damages, as per the agreement.