BALRAJ Vs. KASHMIR KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by defendant No.8. The plaintiff filed suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell through her attorney Bhag Singh, alleging that on 27.5.1982 agreement was executed by defendant No.1 and Shangara Singh (deceased) in respect of 16 kanals of land situated in Village Boara along with rights of irrigation, passage and 1/7 share of tubewell, all kinds of trees standing on the land and other rights appurtenant thereto on payment of Rs. 18,000/ - after deducting Rs. 4900/ - paid by way of earnest money to Sadhu Singh and Shangara Singh and in the alternative, suit for recovery of Rs. 7900/ -. The sale deed was to be executed upto 20th Jeth, 2039 B.K. on payment of balance sale consideration and in case of failure to execute the sale deed, the plaintiff was entitled to get the agreement to sell specifically enforced through Court, or to get Rs. 3500/ - plus damages suffered by her and in case the plaintiff failed to get the sale deed executed, the earnest money was to be forfeited. The agreement was entered on 2.9.1981 and renewed on 27.5.1982 when the plaintiff paid another sum of Rs. 1400/ - to Sadhu Singh and Shangara Singh on the same terms and conditions which were incorporated in the earlier agreement and then they agreed to execute the sale deed on or before 27.11.1982. An endorsement was also made on the back of the agreement dated 2.9.1981. The plaintiff had alleged that she had always been ready and willing to perform her part of the Contract on payment of balance sale consideration but Sadhu Singh and Shangara Singh (deceased, represented by defendants No.1 to 6), failed to execute the sale deed. It is also alleged that the sale made in favour of defendants No.1 to 3 is also illegal.

(2.) DEFENDANTS No.1 to 3 in their joint written statement controverted the plaintiff's allegations and alleged that defendant No.1 and Shangara Singh (deceased) were having dealings with the plaintiff, her husband and brother Bhag Singh. It is also alleged that the signatures/thumb -impressions might have been taken on the blank papers and converted into the agreement which was without any consideration. Defendant No.1 had sold land measuring 4 kanals, out of khasra Nos.230 and 239, to defendant No.8 for Rs. 6000/ - vide sale deed dated 22.9.1982 and defendants No.2 and 3 sold the land measuring 8 kanals 10 marlas out of 42 kanals 15 marlas of land to defendant no.7 for Rs. 7000/ - vide sale deed dated 7.9.1982. Defendants No.7 and 8 filed their separate written statement in which they denied the plaintiff's allegations and pleaded that they are bona fide purchasers of the land in dispute without notice.

(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed: -