MEENU Vs. SANJAY KHANAGWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Suit for specific performance filed by plaintiff - Smt. Meenu (appellant herein) was decreed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Bhiwani vide his judgment dtd. 2/5/2012. However, the appeal filed by the defendant -Sanjay Khanagwal (respondent herein) was though dismissed, but the appellate Court of learned Addl. District Judge, Bhiwani vide his judgment dtd. 18/2/2014, while modifying the relief, declined the relief of specific performance, and ordered the defendant to pay double the earnest money to the plaintiff in terms of the agreement (Ex.P1), along with interest. Against this reversal qua the relief of specific performance, plaintiff has approached this Court by way of the present regular second appeal.

(2.) Trial Court record was called. The same has been perused. In order to avoid any confusion, parties shall be referred as per their status before the trial Court.

(3.) As per the case pleaded by the plaintiff, the defendant is the owner of the disputed house measuring 70 square yards, situated in Bhiwani, and fully detailed and described in the headnote of the plaint. The plaintiff as serts that the defendant agreed to sell the property to her through an agreement dtd. 5/10/2006 (Ex.P1) for a sale consideration of Rs.75,000.00. Out of this amount, Rs.50,000.00 was received by the defendant as earnest money in the presence of witnesses, and the sale deed was agreed to be executed on 5/1/2007. The agreement also contained the usual default clauses. The plaintiff claims that since 5/1/2007 was a holiday, she approached the defendant beforehand, requesting that the sale deed either be executed on 4/1/2007 or on 8/1/2007, after the holiday. On 4/1/2007, the plaintiff, along with the balance consideration of Rs.25,000.00 and other necessary expenses, remained present at the office of the Sub-Registrar, Bhiwani; however, the defendant failed to appear. The plaintiff marked her presence through an affidavit. Again, on 8/1/2007, she waited at the Sub-Registrar's office, but the defendant did not show up, and she once again recorded her presence by affidavit. Despite several subsequent requests, the defendant refused to execute the sale deed. Consequently, the plaintiff served him with a legal notice dtd. 8/2/2007, to which he did not respond. The plaintiff claims that she has always been, and continues to be, ready and willing to perform her part of the contract. Accordingly, she prayed for a decree of specific performance of the agreement dtd. 5/10/2006.