RESHAM SINGH Vs. ASHWANI KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff-Appellant-Resham Singh filed suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 09.05.1989 alleged to have been executed by Jagmohan Lal husband of Savitri Devi-defendant-respondent No.1, since deceased, and father of Ashwani Kumar-defendant-respondent No.2.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff in brief was that Jagmohan Lal son of Bawa Baijnath was owner in possession of the land measuring 44 kanals situated in the area of village Ojhanwali Tehsil Fazilka, comprising of rectangle number 28//21 (8-0), 22 (8-0), 29//22/2 (4-0), 23 (8-0), 24 (8-0), 25(8-0) as per the entry in the Jamabandi for the year 1983-84. He executed agreement to sell dated 09.05.1989 for a sum of Rs. 55,000/- in favour of plaintiff and received Rs. 20,000/- as earnest money. The date for execution and registration of sale deed was decided to be 15th Maghar, Samvat 2046 (i.e.30.11.1989) after receiving the balance consideration. It was further agreed that the sale deed will be executed in favour of plaintiff-appellant within one month from the decision of surplus case in favour of said Jagmohan Lal which was pending at the time of agreement. The possession of the land was delivered to the plaintiff and since then he was in cultivating possession of the same. Surplus case was decided on 31.05.2005, as a result of which Jagmohan Lal became the owner of the suit land and after his death his legal heirs were liable to execute the sale deed as per the terms of agreement dated 09.05.1989. It was averred that the plaintiff had always been ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and entitled to relief of specific performance or in the alternative recovery of Rs. 58,800/- i.e. Rs. 20,000/- as earnest money and Rs. 38,800/- towards interest @ 1% per month from the date of agreement till the date of filing of the suit.

(3.) The respondent contested the claim of plaintiff inter alia pleading that the impugned agreement is result of conspiracy hatched by plaintiff in connivance with attesting witnesses and document writer and is a false, forged and fabricated document which do not bear signatures of Jagmohan Lal. No such agreement was ever executed by Jagmohan Lal predecessor-in-interest of the defendants. The plaintiff is in illegal possession over the suit land and in order to retain his illegal possession he has fabricated the agreement in question. The prices of the land in the year 1989 was Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre and sale consideration mentioned in agreement as Rs. 55,000/- for 44 kanals is nominal one. The defendants also came up with counter claim seeking possession of land in suit measuring 44 kanals and also sought relief of permanent injunction restraining the plaintiff from cutting, lifting or removing 93 trees from the suit land and also to give account of uprooting/removing of 2 tahli and one kikkar tree to the defendants. It was alleged that the plaintiff under the guise of agreement has illegally and criminally trespassed over the suit land and his possession over the suit land is illegal.