RESHMA GAUTAM Vs. NIRMALA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below granting specific performance of agreement dated 9-4-1991 and 7-10-1994.

(2.) The plaintilt-respondent filed a suit for specific performance of the aforesaid agreements alleging therein that the defendant agreed to sell her house to the plaintiff for Rs. 3 lacs and received Rs. 1,20,000/- through cheque. The sale deed was to be executed on or before 8-10-1994. Since the defendant could not execute the sale deed on the date fixed, time for execution of the sale deed was extended uptill 15-2-1995 but a sum of Rs. 1,80,000/- was received by the defendant as full and final amount of sale of the house from the plaintiff. An agreement was executed on 7-10-1994 in respect of payment of balance sale consideration of Rs. 1,80,000/-. The sale deed was to be executed on or before 15-2-1995 but the defendant did not turn up for the registration of the sale deed on 14-2-1995 and 16-2-1995 and subsequently present suit for specific performance was filed on 9-3-1995.

(3.) The defendant denied the agreement and asserted that, in fact, one Kanta Sharma started business of committee by enrolling members. Dr. Puran Chand, husband of the appellant-defendant, undertook to provide all the members for joining the said committee. Seven members contributed seven installments but Kanta Sharma died in the month of November, 1993. The members compelled the husband of the appellant to pay back their amount but on failure to return such amount, a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- was taken as loan from the husband of the plaintiff. The amount was advanced by Om Parkash, husband of the plaintiff, vide cheque in the name of wife of Puran Chand on interest at the rate of 3% per month. The defendant was made to sign certain papers. The said cheque of Rs. 1,20,000/- was issued in the presence of Prem Singh Grewal, Bharat Das and Rakesh Kumar. This loan was got advanced with the help of Baij Nath Sharma who was close to the husband of the plaintiff. Shri Prem Singh, Boothgarh, Bharat Ram, Bhag Singh etc. were said to be members of the committee. The defendant alleged that the defendant has only one house which is newly constructed and the value of the property is not less than Rs. 10 lacs. The agreement cannot be enforced as it is a case of hardship hit by Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. It has also been pleaded that the husband of the defendant was in need of money and he has raised loan of Rs. 1 lac. The husband of the plaintiff made arrangement to make payment of said amount through cheque in the account of Lachhman. Dass, brother of the husband of the defendant. The said amount was withdrawn by Lachhman Dass from his account on 11-4- 1994 and later on this amount was returned by Puran Chand, husband of the defendant, in the account of his brother. Om Parkash, husband of the plaintiff, withdrew an amount of Rs. One lac from the account of Lachhman Dass on 29-4-1994. The defendant also denied the receipt of Rs. 1,80,000/- and execution ot agreement dated 7-10-1994. The defendant alleged that the documents are false and fabricated.