WAZIR SINGH Vs. RAM GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved against the concurrent findings recorded by both the learned courts below, thereby decreeing the suit for possession by way of specific performance filed by the plaintiff-respondent, defendant has approached this court by way of instant appeal. Brief facts of the case, as recorded by the learned Additional District Judge in paras 2 and 3 of the impugned judgment, are that the plaintiff-respondent filed a suit alleging that defendant was owner in possession of 23K-4M of land being 1/3rd share of 71K-11M of land comprised in Khewat No. 61/60 min. Khata No. 71 situated in the revenue estate of village Dobh. The defendant out of his share in the suit land agreed to sell 4 kanals land to the plaintiff for Rs. 18,000/- i.e. At the rate of Rs. 36,000/- per acre. Written agreement was executed by the parties on 6.6.1992. The defendant received Rs. 5000/- as earnest money from the plaintiff and sale-deed was agreed to be executed upto 5.6.1993 on payment of balance sale consideration of Rs. 13000/-. The plaintiff had always been and was still ready and willing to perform his part of the contract but the defendant failed to perform his part of the contract. The plaintiff asked the defendant many a times to get the sale-deed executed and registered as per agreement on payment of balance sale price and expenses of sale-deed but he refused. On 5.6.1993, the last date stipulated in the agreement for executed and registration of the sale-deed, the plaintiff alongwith balance sale amount and expenses of sale deed went to the office of Sub-Registrar, Rohtak, to get the sale executed and registered as per agreement and also moved application before Sub-Registrar but the defendant did not turn up. The plaintiff also sent notice dated 22.12.1994 by registered A.D. post to the defendant for executing the sale-deed as per agreement but no reply was received. So, the plaintiff claimed decree for possession of 4 kanals of land in suit by way of specific performance of the sale agreement dated 6.6.1992 on payment of balance sale-price of Rs. 13000/- and for execution and registration of requisite sale-deed.

(2.) The defendant in his written statement while admitting his share in the disputed land controverted the other plaint allegations broadly and inter-alia pleaded that there is no agreement between the parties for sale of the agricultural land and the question of taking Rs. 5000/- as earnest money does not arise. If there is any agreement, the same is vague document. The plaintiff has no right to ask the defendant for execution of the sale-deed. The defendant has no knowledge about the application moved by plaintiff before the Sub-Registrar. The suit is not maintainable in the present from and the plaintiff has no locus-standi to file the suit."

(3.) On completion of pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the learned trial Court:--