KIRPAL SINGH Vs. KHAZAN SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a regular second appeal by the now aggrieved plaintiff -appellant Kirpal Singh, against the findings dated 17th April, 1986 of the First Appellate Court of learned District and Sessions Judge, Amritsar. Initially the learned trial Court of Sub Judge 1st Class Ajnala (Amritsar) through judgment and decree dated 11th March, 1985 decreed the suit of the plaintiff for specific performance of the contract of sale dated 23rd April, 1982, in respect of land measuring 30 kanals and 14 marlas being 4/5 share out of total land measuring 38 kanals and 8 marlas belonging to Varinder Singh, Karamjit Singh, Jagjit Kaur and Gajwinder Kaur alias Rajwinder Kaur, heirs of deceased Bharpur Singh, situated in the revenue estate of Pandori Sukha Singh, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar. These findings were subsequently modified by the First Appellate Court of learned District and Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereby, the learned Court instead partly allowed the appeal of defendants, the then appellants, Khazan Singh and others and set aside the decree for specific performance passed in favour of the plaintiff and rather decreed in the alternate for the recovery of Rs. 10,000/ - i.e. Rs. 5,000/ - being earnest money and Rs. 5,000/ - being liquidated damages against defendants No. 5 to 7. The cogently established facts which could not be disputed by Mr. B.R. Gupta, Advocate, representing the respondents and even have been firmly established in the evidence and consistently upheld by the two Courts below are that defendants No. 5 to 7 entered into an agreement to sell in respect of this very agricultural land vide agreement dated 23.4.1982 Ex.P 1, whereby, the agreed rate was Rs. 22,000/ - per killa and out of which the owners received Rs. 5,000/ - as earnest money and undertook to execute the sale deed by 15th Poh, 2038 corresponding to December, 1982. It needs to be stressed here that admittedly this land earlier was under mortgage with defendants Khazan Singh and others for sum of Rs. 40,000/ - and it was highlighted so in this agreement. It is alleged that the owners through the two sale deeds both dated 8.6.1982 Ex.D1 and Ex.D3 sold this land to these defendants on the basis of an agreement to sell dated 8.3.1982 pertaining to 23 kanals of this land @ Rs. 20,000/ - per killa. Aggrieved over this, the plaintiff filed suit for possession by way of specific performance of his agreement to sell and in the alternate sought a recovery of Rs. 10,000. It is essential to highlight here that during the course of this appeal, legal heirs of Chanan Singh and Khazan Singh respondents were arrayed so.

(2.) THE stand of the plaintiff is vehemently denied by defendants No. 1 to 4, who in their joint written reply have staked the claim that it was on the basis of agreement to sell dated 8.3.1982 they have purchased the property for valuable consideration through two sale transactions both dated 8.6.1982 Ex.D1 and Ex.D3 showing total ignorance of any such agreement to sell so claimed by the plaintiff and have sought to project themselves as bonafide purchasers for valuable consideration. The owners -defendants in their separate written statements had denied the agreement to sell so claimed by the plaintiff in his favour. The plaintiff reiterated his stand in his replication. The learned trial Court framed the following issues: -

(3.) WHETHER the plaintiff is entitled to the specific performance? OPP