LAWS(P&H)-2010-3-73

HARBANS SINGH Vs. RAJINDER SINGH ALIAS KARTAR SINGH

Decided On March 23, 2010
HARBANS SINGH Appellant
V/S
Rajinder Singh Alias Kartar Singh Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendants' regular second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 7.5.1990, passed by the learned District Judge, Faridkot, decreeing the suit filed by the plaintiff/respondent for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 10.6.1977.

(2.) Plaintiff Rajinder Singh alias Kartar Singh filed a suit for possession by specific performance of agreement to sell dated 10.6.1977 for sale of land measuring 74 kanals situated at village Langiana Nawan Tehsil Moga. The property in dispute was under the ownership of Jiwan son of Badan Singh. On his death property was succeeded by Smt. Gurdev Kaur and Smt. Kartar Kaur defendants who were his daughters.

(3.) One Pritam Singh and Malkiat Singh set up a Will claiming inheritance of Jiwan Singh. Said litigation ended in favour of defendants No. 1 and Smt. Gurdev Kaur and Smt. Kartar Kaur. The case of the plaintiff was that defendants No. 1 and agreed to sell suit land to the plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 6000/- (Rupees six thousand only) per acre. Sale deed was agreed to be executed after one year of the decision of civil and revenue litigation regarding suit land. Sale expenses were agreed to be borne by the plaintiff. Plaintiff claimed that a sum of Rs. 15,500/- (Rupees fifteen thousand and five hundred only) was paid to defendants No. 1 and as earnest money. There was stipulation in the agreement that in case of default by the plaintiff, the earnest money would be forfeited and in case of default by the vendor, the plaintiff would be entitled to specific performance of the agreement. It was also pleaded case of the plaintiff that the defendants were also liable to refund the earnest money and pay damages to the tune of Rs. 15,500/- (Rupees fifteen thousand and five hundred only). The case of the plaintiff/respondent was that defendants Nos. 1 and 2 took proprietary possession from Malkiat Singh and Pritam Singh under the orders of the court. However, they could not get actual possession of the land as the learned court was pleased to hold that Niranjan Singh, father of Pritam Singh and Malkiat Singh was in possession as a tenant. As the date of agreement was to expire, therefore, on 8.6.1980 defendants Nos. 1 and 2 received another sum of Rs. 7000/- (Rupees seven thousand only) and extended the time for execution of the sale deed. It was stipulated therein that after getting possession from Niranjan Singh, defendants Nos. 1 and 2 would execute the sale deed.