LAKHWINDER SINGH Vs. BALWINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendant's second appeal challenging the judgments and decrees of the Courts below whereby the suit of the plaintiff -respondent for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell in question has been decreed.

(2.) SUFFICE is to say that in the written statement filed on behalf of the defendant -appellant, he has taken a specific stand denying the execution of the agreement to sell in question with a further averment that the appellant had already executed an agreement dated 3.2.1998 with Mohinder Singh s/o Teja Singh, as a security on the condition that in case he fails to return a sum of Rs. 54,400/ - to one Mohinder Singh, he will execute the sale deed regarding suit land in his favour and to grab the suit land, Mohinder Singh has obtained signatures of the defendant -appellant on a blank paper and has prepared a false and fictitious agreement and, thus, the agreement in question is false and fictitious.

(3.) COUNSEL for the defendant -appellant, even before this Court has failed to point out any material evidence to challenge the aforesaid concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below. Faced with this situation, counsel for the appellant has submitted before this Court that keeping in view the hardship being caused to the appellant, the Courts below should not have granted the decree for specific performance of the agreement to sell and should have decreed the suit for alternative relief of the recovery of the earnest amount. Again the aforesaid argument is without any merit as no hardship has been pleaded before the Courts below by the appellant.