KANWAR SINGH Vs. RAKESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants-Kanwar Singh @ Kanwar Chand and Ors. have filed regular second appeal against impugned judgment and decree dtd. 19/10/2022 passed by Additional District Judge, Rewari vide which appeal preferred against judgment and decree dtd. 9/10/2018 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rewari, was dismissed.

(2.) As per the facts of the case, the respondent/plaintiff-Rakesh Sharma filed suit for recovery of Rs.56,16,013.00 from the defendants i.e. Rs.12,11,000.00 each from defendants No.1 and 2 i.e. Kanwar Singh @ Kanwar Chand and Ami Lal @ Ami Ram and Rs.10,64,671.00 each from defendants No.3 to 5 i.e. Baniram, Patram and Rajpal. It was alleged that the defendants were owners in possession of land measuring 37 Kanal 2 Marla situated at Village Ladhuwas Gurjar, Tehsil and District Rewari bearing khasra numbers as detailed in Jamabandi for the year 2013-14. The said defendants entered into an agreement to sell regarding the agricultural land as per their shares on 18/11/2011 for a sale consideration of Rs.1,21,10,000.00 per acre. They had received Rs.56,16,013.00 as earnest money from the plaintiff. The date fixed for the execution and registration of sale deed was on or before 31/1/2012. The plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of agreement to sell. He remained present in the office of Sub Registrar, Rewari on 31/1/2012 from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM but the defendants or their authorized person did not come present to perform their part of agreement to sell. Thereafter, the plaintiff had met the defendants personally several times to perform their part of agreement to sell but they put off the matter on one pretext or the other. However, now the suit property has come under the town planning area and master plan. There is a breach of agreement to sell on the part of defendants. Therefore, he is entitled to recover his earnest money. On their refusal to return the earnest money, the present suit was filed on 31/1/2015. In fact the plaintiff had suffered heart attack and he was admitted in the hospital till 5/2/2015 and ultimately, the suit was filed with a delay of about 7 days regarding which he had filed separate application.

(3.) Notice of the suit was given to the defendants. They appeared and filed their written statement raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability, concealment of facts, locus-standi and cause of action to file the present suit. They also raised objection regarding the suit barred by limitation. On merits, no specific reply was given to paras No.1 and 2 of the plaint and it was alleged that it is a matter of record and needs no reply. It was further claimed that the plaintiff be put to strict proof of the contents mentioned in para No.2 of the plaint. It was further alleged that the plaintiff did not come to the office of Sub Registrar, Rewari on the target date for the execution and registration of the sale deed. In fact he was not having sufficient means for the execution and registration of the sale deed. The defendants served a legal notice to the plaintiff terminating the agreement to sell in question. The defendants had appeared on 31/1/2012 before the Sub Registrar, Rewari but the plaintiff did not turn up. The sending of legal notice on 31/1/2012 to the defendants to execute the sale deed was also denied. By taking this stand the defendants prayed that the suit filed by the plaintiff may be dismissed with cost.