DHAN SINGH Vs. JAGBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is filed by the defendants who suffered a decree for specific performance of the agreement for sale.

(2.) The plaintiff in a suit for specific performance of agreement for sale has contended that defendants No.1 & 2 executed the suit agreement for sale on 8.1.2002, having received the full consideration of sale to the tune of Rs. 2,40,000/-. The defendant also having acknowledged the payment of entire sale consideration passed on a receipt there for. The possession of the suit land also was delivered by the defendants to the plaintiff on the execution of the agreement. They also executed a General Power of Attorney in favour of the plaintiff. But during the course of the proceedings of the suit filed separately by the plaintiff for bare injunction restraining the defendants from alienating the suit land to the third party, the plaintiff came to know that the defendants not only cancelled the General Power of Attorney executed by them in favour of the plaintiff but they also sold the properties in favour of defendants No.4 & 5. Hence the suit for specific performance of the agreement for sale.

(3.) Defendants No.1 & 2 have contended in their written statement that there was no agreement for sale executed by them as contended by the plaintiff. No sale consideration also was received by them, nor was any delivery of possession by the defendants in favour of the plaintiff. It is submitted that the plaintiff got financed a tractor in his name, but the said tractor was purchased for the use of defendants No.1 & 2. At that point of time, the plaintiff took their signatures and thumb impressions on various blank papers. The blank papers were not returned to them. The General Power of Attorney created based on the blank documents was cancelled by the defendants. They have contended that with a view to grab the suit property the plaintiff has concocted the documents and filed the suit.