BALWINDER SINGH Vs. PAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the appellant filed Civil Suit No.50 dated 09.08.2003 against the respondent for declaration to the effect that he is owner and in exclusive possession being purchaser of the disputed property and for permanent injunction restraining the respondent from alienating in any manner by way of sale, gift, mortgage, exchange to any person and to unnecessarily interfere into the peaceful possession of the appellant and from dispossessing the appellant illegally and forcibly, without due course of law, from the house measuring about 5 Marlas situated within the Abadi/Khasra No.91, which stands in the name of Gainda Singh son of Bela son of Baru, situated in Village Togan, Tehsil Kharar, District S.A.S. Nagar. It was mentioned in the plaint that property situated at Village Togan inclusive of the suit property was jointly owned and possessed by Amar Singh, Gurdial Singh, Santokh Singh, late Piara Singh and Pal Singh being brothers. The property situated at village Togan was mutually divided between the above said persons and the suit property fell to the share of respondent. In the year 1999, suit property was sold to the appellant for a total consideration of Rs. 60,000 and thereafter by spending huge amount of Rs. 1,52,558 construction was raised upon the suit property. Electricity and water connections were also installed in the name of appellant. It was further mentioned in the plaint that few months prior to the filing of the present suit, respondent intended to repurchase the suit property and an oral agreement was entered into between the litigating parties. As per the terms of the said agreement, an amount of Rs. 1,90,000 was to be paid to the appellant by the respondent. Out of total amount settled between the parties, Rs. 97,000 were paid by the respondent. Possession of the house was to be delivered to the respondent on receipt of total sale consideration which was never paid by the respondent. Legal notice dated 06.06.2003 was issued by the respondent admitting the possession of the appellant over the said house. The information received by the appellant to the effect that respondent intends to execute another agreement to sell coupled with the threats to obtain possession of the suit property forcibly led to filing of the present suit praying for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction.

(2.) THE respondent appeared and filed written statement. He admitted relationship between the parties. It was also admitted that legal heirs of Gainda Singh mutually divided the property and suit property fell to the share of respondent. It was categorically denied that respondent ever sold the property to the appellant. Rather as per the case of respondent, vide family settlement document dated 10.05.2003, Rs. 97,000 were paid to the appellant on account of construction and possession of the house was handed over to the respondent. It has further been averred that the appellant has concealed the factum of settlement.

(3.) AFTER framing of issues, the parties led evidence. Vide judgment and decree dated 20.11.2012, the trial Court dismissed the suit filed by the appellant.