SMT. BHOTI AND OTHERS Vs. BALDEV AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal has been brought by defendants No. 2 and 3, to whom the land allegedly agreed to be sold by Sombir, defendant No. 1 to plaintiff Baldev, was sold subsequent to the execution of the agreement of sale. Baldev filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 14.2.2006. This agreement was preceded by another agreement which merged into this agreement. The suit was originally brought against Sombir but as after filing of the suit, defendant No. 1 sold the property in favour of defendants No. 2 and 3, the appellants, they were impleaded in the suit. Suit was decreed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kaithal vide judgment and decree dated 8.3.2011. The appeal preferred by the appellants against the said judgment failed before learned District Judge, Kaithal vide judgment and decree dated 27.4.2013. Stating in brief, the case of Baldev had been that defendant No. 1 was owner of land measuring 23 kanals 16 marlas which was agreed to be sold by him to the plaintiff for a consideration of Rs. 8,03,250/ - out of which a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/ - was paid as earnest money on two occasions. On the target date, Baldev went to the office of Sub Registrar and kept waiting for Satbir, but he did not turn up. It was agreed that in case the defendant failed to execute the sale deed, the plaintiff would be at liberty to get the sale deed executed through court of law.

(2.) DEFENDANT No. 1, besides taking a number of preliminary objections regarding maintainability of the suit, locus standi of the plaintiff to file the suit etc. had averred that he did not execute the agreement of sale. He claimed that he was kidnapped by the plaintiff and others and was kept in confinement for 10 days during which he was kept under intoxication and was forcibly made to thumb mark some blank papers, blank stamp papers and blank revenue stamps affixed on a paper as also on a register. He claimed that he filed a complaint against the above mentioned persons which was sent under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and FIR came to be registered with regard to that.

(3.) THE parties went to trial on the following issues: -