LAWS(P&H)-1990-12-72

DURLABH SINGH Vs. NAHAR SINGH AND ORS.

Decided On December 07, 1990
DURLABH SINGH Appellant
V/S
Nahar Singh and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is Defendant 's appeal challenging the judgment and decree passed by Sub Judge 1st Class, Ludhiana, dated 1 -6 -1978 whereby the suit of the Plaintiff -Respondent for specific performance of the agreement dated 16 -10 -1975 for sale of agricultural land measuring 10 Bighas 6 Biswas comprised in Khewat No. 6, Khatauni No. 6, Khasra No. 42 (4B -UB) and 43 (5B -15 -B) situated in village Kotla Afghana District Ludhiana, was decreed. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are:

(2.) The Defendant -Appellant agreed to sell land under agreement dated 16 -10 -1975 for a sum of Rs. 41,200/ - at the rate of Rs. 4,000/ - per Bigha. A sum of Rs. 15,000/ - was paid as earnest money at the time of execution of the agreement of sale. The last date for execution of the sale deed was 15 -6 -1976. The further averment in the plaint was that the land agreed to be sold was under mortgage with Bhupinder Singh, Defendant No. 2 for a sum of Rs. 9,000/ - and it was agreed between the parties that this mortgaged amount would be paid by the Plaintiff -Respondent out of the total sale price so that the Plaintiff may get the land redeemed from Defendant No. 2. The Plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and is still willing and ready to perform his part of contract. The Plaintiff went to the Sub Registrar's office on 15 -6 -1976 which was the last date for execution of sale deed but the Defendant -Appellant did not turn up there. The Plaintiff issued notice to Defendant to execute the sale deed which he did not, hence the present suit for specific performance of the contract was filed.

(3.) The Defendant appeared and resisted the suit filed by the Plaintiff. The execution of the agreement of sale was denied. Alleged agreement dated 16 -10 -19 5, if any was alleged to be false and fictitious document being the result of fraud and deception played upon him with the connivance of marginal witness and the scribe. The receipt of earnest money of Rs. 15,000/ - was denied. Issuance of notice by the Plaintiff to the Defendant for execution of the sale deed was also denied.