VIJAY KUMAR Vs. RAKESH KUMAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vijay Kumar Defendant No. 1, having remained unsuccessful in both the lower courts, has filed the instant second appeal.

(2.) Rakesh Kumar Respondent No. 1-Plaintiff filed suit against Appellant and proforma Respondents No. 2 to 8 alleging that Chand Rani agreed to sell the suit property to the Plaintiff for Rs. 2,00,00/- and received Rs. 40,000/- as earnest money and executed agreement to sell dated 24.04.1998. Plaintiff was already in possession of the suit property as tenant. Sale deed was to be executed up to 31.08.1999. However, Chand Rani expired before the said date. Defendants are sons and daughters of Chand Rani and are her legal heirs. Vijay Kumar Defendant No. 1-Appellant claimed to be sole owner of the disputed shop on the basis of will executed by his mother Chand Rani and accordingly, received rent of the suit shop from the Plaintiff since 24.10.1998 to 23.12.1998. Accordingly, Plaintiff served notice dated 06.08.1999 on Defendant No. 1 requiring him to execute the sale deed of the disputed shop on 31.08.1999 in favour of the Plaintiff as per terms and conditions of the agreement. Defendant No. 1 sent reply to the notice asking the Plaintiff to send copy of the agreement. Accordingly, the Plaintiff sent copy of the agreement to Defendant No. 1 on 16.08.1999. The Plaintiff went to the office of Sub- Registrar on 31.08.1999 for getting the sale deed executed in terms of the agreement, but the Defendants did not turn up. Accordingly, Plaintiff filed suit for specific performance of the impugned agreement with confirmation of his possession over the disputed shop.

(3.) Defendants No. 3, 5 and 8 were proceeded ex parte.