DARBARA SINGH Vs. SATISH KUMAR AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Darbara Singh defendant No. 1 is in second appeal.

(2.) Satish Kumar plaintiff filed suit against the appellant Darbara Singh and against State Bank of India Respondent No. 2/defendant No. 2. Plaintiff's case is that defendant No. 1-appellant vide agreement dated 4.3.1998 agreed to sell suit land measuring 16 kanals to the plaintiff for 1,10,000/- and received one lac as earnest money and executed said agreement. Sale deed was to be executed upto 30.6.1999. However, on 30.6.1999 date for execution of the sale deed was extended to 2.2.2000 by making endorsement on the back of the agreement. Accordingly, on 2.2.2000 the plaintiff attended office of Sub Registrar with requisite amount to get the sale deed executed in terms of the agreement but defendant No. 1 did not turn up. Thus, defendant No. 1 committed breach of agreement whereas plaintiff has always been ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement. The plaintiff even sent notice dated 28.4.2001 to defendant No. 1 but still defendant No. 1 did not execute the sale deed. On the contrary, defendant No. 1 mortgaged suit land with defendant No. 2.

(3.) Defendant No. 2 was proceeded ex parte whereas defendant No. 1 contested the suit and denied plaint allegations. Defendant No. 1 pleaded that he was selling his agricultural produce at the shop of M/s Banwari Lal Raja Ram Commission Agents of which plaintiff is a partner. Defendant No. 1 used to take money according to his needs from the said Commission Agents and thumb impressions of defendant No. 1 used to be obtained on the blank stamp papers as security for the said amounts. However, the same were adjusted from the sale proceeds of crops of defendant No. 1. The said firm was not keeping proper accounts and therefore, defendant No. 1 stopped selling his produce through the said firm and intended to file suit for rendition of account. Plaintiff has used blank stamp paper for forging agreement. It was also pleaded that market price of the suit land was not less than 2 lacs per acre whereas according to agreement the sale price is 55,000/- per acre only. Endorsement regarding extension of date of sale deed does not bear thumb impression of defendant No. 1. Various other pleas were also raised.