MUKHTIAR SINGH Vs. M L GOEL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a first appeal of the defendant against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Ist Class, Chandigarh, dated 28th May, 1981.

(2.) Briefly,the facts are that Mukhtiar Singh defendant is the owner of House No. 171, sector 20-A, Chandigarh. He agreed to sell it to the plaintiffs vide agreement dated 21st May, 1977 (Exhibit P.4) for an amount of Rs. 78,000/-. The amount of Rs. 20,000/- as earnest money was paid at the time of execution of the agreement. It was agreed between the parties that the sale-deed was to be executed on or before 21st September, 1977, and the balance amount of Rs. 58,000/- was to be paid by the plaintiffs before the Sub Registrar at the time of registration of the document. It was also agreed that the defendant would hand over all the necessary papers which were required to be produced before the Life Insurance Corporation, Chandigarh, by the plaintiffs, for obtaining loan for purchase of the house. On 20th September, 1977, the plaintiffs paid an amount of Rs. 9000/- more as earnest money to the defendant and the latter agreed to extend the time for execution of the sale-deed upto 21st April, 1978. The agreement, Exhibit P.6 in that regard was executed between the parties. It is averted by the plaintiffs that they had always been ready and willing to perform their part of the agreement. The defendant failed to perform his part of the agreement. It is also averred that they requested the defendant several times to execute the sale deed but he did not do so. Consequently, they filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement and in the alternative for recovery of Rs. 69,310/- (Rs. 58,000/-) on account of damages and Rs. 11,310/- on account of interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum upto 20th May, 1979 with future interest at the rate of 19% per cent per annum from the date of filing of the suit till its realisation.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendant who inter alia pleaded that the plaintiffs were not ready and willing to perform their part of the agreement, whereas he was always ready and willing to perform their part of the agreement. It is next averred that plaintiff No. 1 gave an affidavit dated 13th February, 1978, that he had paid Rs. 29,000/- to the defendant in two instalments as loan free of interest and that the same could be paid back by him in easy instalments. In view of the said affidavit, it is stated that the plaintiffs could ask only for the refund of the amount of Rs. 29,000/- only. Some other pleas were also taken but those do not survive in appeal.