PRITAM KAUR Vs. JOGINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant/Defendant - Pritam Kaur, has preferred this second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 13.5.2010 passed by Additional District Judge, Patiala, vide which he dismissed the appeal preferred by her against the judgment and decree dated 13.6.2009 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Rajpura, in the suit of the Respondent/Plaintiff - Joginder Singh for specific performance of the agreement.

(2.) The case of the Plaintiff, as pleaded in the plaint, is that the Defendant agreed to sell the land in dispute measuring 9 bighas 18 biswas, being 1/9th share out of 26 bighas 3 biswas of land, situated in revenue estate of Village Alimajra Tehsil Rajpura vide agreement dated 23.11.1998 for Rs.1,08,750/-and received Rs.20,000/-as earnest money/advance sale consideration. The sale deed was to be executed and got registered on or before 22.11.2001. He always remained ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and was ready with the balance sale consideration of Rs.88,750/-. On 22.11.2001, he remained present in the office of Sub Registrar, along with the balance sale consideration and the other expenses required for execution and registration of the sale deed, but the Defendant did not turn up. About his presence he got attested affidavit. He also served registered notice dated 4.12.2001 through his counsel upon the Defendant, but he failed to execute the sale deed in his favour.

(3.) The suit was contested by the Defendant. In her statement, she denied all the contentions of the Plaintiff and inter alia pleaded that the agreement is false and fictitious and is the result of fraud. Previously, one Sardar Singh filed civil suit against him, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 12.8.1999. There was dispute between the Plaintiff and Arjan Singh etc. regarding which DDR No. 7 dated 10.9.1999 was got lodged in the police post Shambu. A compromise was entered into in that DDR and it was mentioned therein that the suit land shall be divided to the extent of 1/2 share each. However, the Plaintiff prepared a false and frivolous agreement, which has no value in the eyes of law. The suit is not legally maintainable.