LAWS(P&H)-2014-5-634

DAYAL SINGH Vs. AVTAR SINGH AND ORS.

Decided On May 16, 2014
DAYAL SINGH Appellant
V/S
Avtar Singh and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No.1 has filed the instant appeal challenging the judgments and decrees of the Courts below whereby suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreement dated 29.3.1995 filed on behalf of plaintiff-respondent has been decreed. Plaintiff-respondent filed the instant suit seeking a decree of possession by way of specific performance of agreement dated 29.3.1995, with a further prayer to restrain the appellant from alienating the suit property in any manner and in alternative praying for a decree for recovery of Rs. 6,90,000/- to be passed in his favour and against the appellant.

(2.) As per the averments made in the suit, appellant being owner of house No.HM-26, Phase 1 SAS Nagar, Mohali entered into an agreement to sell the said house with the plaintiff-respondent on 29.3.1995 for a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- and received an amount of Rs. 2,80,000/- as earnest money and agreed to execute the sale deed on or before 27.5.1995, after having necessary permission and Income Clearance Certificate. It was further averred that appellant received another amount of Rs. 35,000/- on 5.5.1995 and extended the date of execution of the sale deed to 27.7.1995 and further received Rs. 15,000/- on 9.6.1995 and extended the date for execution of the sale deed till 27.9.1995 and again on receipt of Rs. 15,000/- on 27.9.1995 extended the date for execution of the sale deed till 10.11.1995.

(3.) It is the further case of the plaintiff-respondent that he was and is still ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and remained present along with remaining sale consideration in the office of Sub Registrar on the stipulated date i.e.10.11.1995. However, appellant failed to turn up in spite of the fact that respondent-plaintiff sent a telegram dated 6.11.1995 to him informing him to be present before the Registrar on the stipulated date. It is the further case of the plaintiff-respondent that he got issued a notice dated 15.11.1995 upon appellant-defendant to comply with the terms of the notice, but to no effect, hence the present suit.