HANS RAJ Vs. KRISHAN PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is in revision aggrieved against an order passed by the learned first Appellate Court on 05.08.2010, whereby an application to lead additional evidence so as to prove agreement to sell dated 29.08.2004 was dismissed.

(2.) The plaintiff-petitioner has filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 29.08.2004. As per the averments made by the plaintiff, a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- has been paid to the defendant out of the total sale consideration of Rs.2 lac for sale of 11 Marlas of land. The sale deed was to be executed more than one year later i.e. 10.11.2005. The suit for specific performance has been filed on 30.08.2006, in which the plaintiff has produced in evidence photocopy of the agreement, but has not produced the original of the said document. To fill up the lacuna, the plaintiff filed an application for additional evidence in the first appeal. It is the said application, which has been dismissed by the learned first Appellate Court on 05.08.2010.

(3.) The learned first Appellate Court has, inter alia, held that the plaintiff has not examined any of the attesting witnesses nor produced the original agreement. The stand of the plaintiff that the original agreement was misplaced by his counsel is not tenable for the reason that it was the plaintiff who is basing his claim on the basis of the agreement to sell and has failed to produce the original.