PARMODH BHUSHAN PAUL Vs. HARBANS KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration in the second appeal:-

(2.) The plaintiff is the appellant before this Court. The trial Court decreed the suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale in his favour executed on 04.02.1972. The suit was resisted on a plea that the agreement of sale was intended to be a security for a loan advanced by the plaintiff to one Surat Singh who had accompanied the defendant to borrow some money and at that time the document was taken from the defendant. The trial Court rejected this contention but the Appellate Court reversed the decision and dismissed the suit.

(3.) In the appeal filed by the defendant, the Appellate Court reversed the decision on a reasoning that the Court's discretion need not be exercised for the relief of specific performance if the transaction was oppressive. The Court examined the defendant's contentions through the witnesses that the plaintiff was in the habit of taking agreements of sale as security for loans which he had advanced to persons. The Court has also reasoned that at best the plaintiff would have only advanced money by way of loan to the defendant and he had fraudulently taken an agreement of sale in his favour.