MAHINDER SINGH Vs. BHAG SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is Defendant's second appeal challenging the judgments and decrees of the Courts below wherein suit of the Plaintiff- Respondent for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell was decreed and the Appellant was restrained from alienating the suit property in any manner.

(2.) As per the facts narrated in the suit, the Appellant entered into an agreement to sell with the Respondent on 30.6.2003 in the presence of the witnesses for sale of the suit property for a total consideration of Rs. 1,50,000/-, the said agreement was got registered before the Sub- Registrar, Hisar and an earnest money of Rs. 1,15,000/- out of the sale consideration was received by him before the Sub-Registrar, Hisar and in the presence of the witnesses. As per agreement, the last date of registering the sale deed was fixed as 30.6.2004. However, the Defendant failed to turn up on the stipulated date. Hence, the present suit. Upon notice, the suit was contested by the Appellant. various preliminary objections were raised in the written statement. On merits, it was contended that the Appellant never agreed to sell the suit land to the Plaintiff/ Respondent nor did he ever received any earnest money/ sale consideration. The alleged agreement was totally incorrect and baseless and was based upon fraud and misrepresentation and without any consideration. It was further pleaded that the Appellant was suffering from mental illness for some time and he was not in a capacity to decide or sell any land on the relevant date. Taking undue advantage of the mental infirmity of the Defendant, the Plaintiff might have been able to get alleged agreement fabricated in connivance with the witnesses. It was further stated that no money was ever paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant. Dismissal of the suit was prayed.

(3.) Plaintiff filed replication to the written statement controverting the contents of the written statement and reiterating the contents of the plaint. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the trial Court: