RAJ KUMAR Vs. SAHRUM AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-defendant No.2 is in Regular Second Appeal against the concurrent findings of fact and law, whereby, the suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 25.10.2005 in respect of the suit land, has been decreed by both the Courts below. Mr. Ashish Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant/defendant No.2 submits that readiness and willingness on the part of the respondent/plaintiff was conspicuously absent. In essence, against the total sale consideration of Rs. 3,78,000/-, Rs. 1,80,000/- stated to have been paid, whereas, on the stipulated date, i.e., 16.01.2006, respondent-plaintiff had purchased stamp paper of Rs. 11,400/- which was not conforming to the total sale consideration but would be of Rs. 2,85,000/-. He further submits that both the Courts below have committed illegality and perversity in wrongly noticing the aforementioned facts. Though appellantdefendant No.2 had not stepped into witness box, but the stand taken in the written statement is that it was loan transaction. Though the stamp paper was not for valuable consideration, but sale deed was executed, therefore, Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, would be attracted.

(2.) I do not intend to differ with the findings rendered by both the Courts below, which are based on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, much less, no substantial question of law arises to be adjudicated by this Court.