LAWS(P&H)-2013-7-1148

JOGINDER AND ANOTHER Vs. PARDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS

Decided On July 02, 2013
JOGINDER AND ANOTHER Appellant
V/S
Pardeep Singh And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal is brought by Joginder and Virender against the judgment and decree dated 16.03.2013, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Hisar, vide which the appeal preferred by the appellants against the judgment and decree dated 26.08.2008 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hansi has been dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stating the case of the plaintiff has been that Pardeep Singh, defendant no.1 was owner of 1146/8019 shares in land measuring 400 kanals 1 marla. Out of it, defendant no.1 entered into an agreement of sale of 24 kanals of land being 480/8019 shares of the said land in favour of the plaintiff for a consideration of Rs.1,20,000/- on 04.03.2004. A sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was paid as earnest money and the date for execution and registration of sale deed was agreed to be 15.02.2005. It was agreed that on receipt of balance sale consideration, defendant no.1 will execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff or a person nominated by him. Actual physical possession of the disputed land was delivered. After 8 to 10 days of occurrence, defendants no.1 and 2 approached the plaintiff and suggested that plaintiff may sell the land to defendant no.2. The plaintiff, however, refused to accept the offer. The plaintiff went to the office of Sub Registrar , Bass on 15.02.2005 with balance sale consideration but defendant no.1 did not turn up. He consequently got his affidavit attested from the Sub Registrar. On 16.02.2005 the plaintiff approached defendant no.1 to inquire about his intention in the matter and defendant no.1 told him that he has already sold the disputed land to defendant no.2. Defendant no.1 also offered to refund the earnest money to the plaintiff.

(3.) Defendant no.1 resisted the suit taking a number of preliminary objections, which are not relevant here. He claimed that he had received a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as earnest money from the plaintiff but has claimed that he had returned the same to the plaintiff in the presence of panchayat and the agreement in favour of the plaintiff was consequently cancelled in the presence of the witnesses.