TARA SINGH Vs. SMT. CHARAN KAUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal of Tara Singh plaintiff whose suit for possession of 40 Kanals and 18 Marlas of land in village Kandhala Jattan of Tehsil Dasuya by way of specific performance on payment of Rs. 5000 though decreed by the Court of the Subordinate -Judge, Dasuya, has been dismissed in appeal by the learned Additional District Judge, Hosbiarpur.

(2.) ON 27th of November, 1963, the first respondent Charan Kaur entered into an agreement of sale of the disputed land with Tara Singh for a sum of Rs. 7000. According to. the agreement, which, is Exhibit P. 2, the sale -deed was to be executed on 27th of April, 1964 and the expenses of the registration were to be equally shared between the vendor and the vendee. A payment of Rs. 2000 was made as earnest money and the balance of Rs. 5000 was to be paid on 27th of April, 1964. Another term of the agreement,(Exhibit P. 2) was that should Charan Kaur fail to execute the agreement, the sum of Rs. 2000 was to be refunded in addition to a sum of Rs. 500. If however, the breach was committed by the vendee, the amount, of Rs. 2000 which had already beempaid, would stand forfeited. On 27th of April, 1964, both parties reached the office of the Sub Registrar, Dasuya, where the document was to be registered, f thought the allegation, of each, side is that the other arrived there late. An application was submitted that day by Charan Kaur for extension of the date of registration by two days.. According to this application which is Exhibit P. 3, the registration was to take place on 27th of April 1964 and the reason given for this extension was that the requisite stamp was not available. The stamp paper for the sale -deed was purchased on 29th of April, 1964, and according to the evidence of the treasurer, Babu Ram, who appeared as P.W. 3, the stamp was purchased in the presence of. the first respondent Charan Kaur Tara Singh appellant and Darshan Singh, the fourth respondent.

(3.) MR . Atma Ram, the Learned Counsel for the appellant has challenged the finding of the lower appellate Court that Tara Singh was himself responsible for the breach. It is pointed out that the plaintiff had definitely alleged in the plaint that he was at all times ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and this plea has never been traversed in the written statement. It is argued by Mr. Atma Ram that in the written statement all that was urged was that the plaintiff wanted the insertion of certain invalid conditions in the sale -deed and for this reason she had declined to execute the agreement. The absence of such an assertion in the written statement does not affect the decision of the lower appellate Court on the first issue in point which is in these words :