SIRI RAM Vs. BAL KISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-defendant is in Regular Second Appeal against the concurrent findings of fact, whereby agreement to sell dated 25.05.2004 has been held to be proved and suit decreed for specific performance of the same, the appellant-defendant has been directed to perform his part of the agreement on receipt of the balance sale consideration.

(2.) Mr. J.P. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant-defendant submits, that agreement to sell ex facie proves that the thumb impression of the appellant-defendant was obtained on the blank papers and on receipt of legal notice preceding to the filing of the suit, complaint under Sec. 420 Penal Code was also filed against the respondent-plaintiff. The agreement to sell does not mention about the separate receipt of Rs. 3,00,000.00 being earnest money against the total sale consideration of Rs. 7,78,125.00. The execution of the agreement to sell was specifically denied. The defendant at the time of agreement to sell was 88 years old and, therefore, fraud has been played upon the defendant. He further submits that as per the statement of DW2 Dr. Yogesh Sharma, it has been found that defendant was having 75% visual disability.

(3.) Mr. Joshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-plaintiff submits, that agreement to sell has been proved through the testimony of PW6 Ramu Kashyap, Stamp Vendor, who had also deposed that purchase of stamp paper has been enetered in his register at Sr. No.2510, page No.100. PW5 Ram Ditta, WBN from the office of Naib Tehsildar, Nigdhu has also been examined to prove the presence marked in the office of Sub-Registrar, in essence, agreement to sell has been proved through the testimony of other attesting witnesses also. The plaintiff had been found to be ready and willing as the target date for execution of the sale deed was 24.05.2005, whereas suit was filed on 23.07.2005. Both the Courts below have concurrently rendered findings against the appellant-defendant which cannot be interfered, until and unless substantial questions of law involved which does not arises for determination.