KULVIR SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. BALJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-defendants are in second appeal before this Court.

(2.) The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for specific performance and permanent injunction by pleading that the suit property was in ownership and in possession of the defendant. An agreement dated 27.12.2006 was executed by the defendants to sell the property in question to the plaintiff for Rs.9,90,000/- per acre (8 kanals). An amount of Rs.2 lacs was received as earnest money on the date of execution of the agreement to sell and the last date for execution of the sale deed was fixed as 30.5.2007. The agreement to sell was executed in the presence of witnesses, namely, Harjinder Singh and Jaggar Singh. It was also pleaded that on 27.1.2007, a further amount of Rs.3 lacs in addition to Rs.2 lacs paid earlier was made over to the defendant and such fact was endorsed in writing on 27.1.2007 itself. It was pleaded that the defendants had not performed their part of agreement and for which even a legal notice had been served to which no reply was received. It was also pleaded that on 30.5.2007, the plaintiff visited the office of Sub Registrar, Barnala for the purposes of execution of the sale-deed and even got his presence marked through affidavit. As the defendants had not turned up for the execution of the sale-deed, as such, the suit had been instituted. The defendants opposed the claim of the plaintiff by taking a stand that the agreement dated 27.12.2006 had since been cancelled as the plaintiff himself had not made the balance payment on 30.5.2007 and as such, an amount of Rs.4,50,000/- stood forfeited. The defendants raised an issue that the plaintiff had wrongly mentioned that a further amount of earnest money of Rs.3 lacs had been paid, whereas it was an amount of Rs.2.50 lacs. The trial Court after hearing the parties and having appreciated the evidence on record decreed the suit for the alternative relief of recovery of Rs.5 lacs with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of execution of the agreement to sell dated 27.12.2006 and future interest @ 6% per annum from the date of passing of the decree till the realization of the decretal amount. Being dissatisfied, the defendant-appellants filed civil appeal in the Court of Additional District Judge, Barnala and vide impugned judgment dated 9.8.2011, the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court has been upheld and the appeal filed by the appellant-defendants has been dismissed.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has been heard at length.