(1.) PLAINTIFF is in appeal against the judgment and decree dated 13.2.1995 passed by the first Appellate Court.
(2.) IN brief, the facts are that the plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance alleging therein that he is in possession of agricultural land measuring 101 Kanals 18 Marlas situated at village Salpani Khurd, Tehsil Thanesar as 'Gair Marusi' tenant. Defendants No. 1 to 4 were the owners of the suit land who executed an agreement dated 21.7.1983 to sell the land measuring 48 Kanals 19 Marlas being half share of land measuring 97 Kanals 18 Marlas, to the plaintiff for a consideration of Rs. 35,000/-. At the time of execution of the agreement, a sum of Rs. 9406/- was paid as earnest money and date for execution of sale deed was fixed as 21.11.1983 on payment of remaining sale consideration. Regarding other half share of 97 Kanals 18 marlas, defendants No. 1 to 4 also executed an agreement to sell in favour of Mela Ram son of Bahadur Ram, son of the plaintiff. It was claimed in the plaint that plaintiff had always been ready and willing to perform his part of contract and was present in the office of Sub Registrar, Thanesar on 21.11.1983 but the defendants did not turn up, therefore, he got his presence marked with the Sub Registrar and also got attested one affidavit in that regard. It was further claimed in the plaint that defendants No. 1 to 3 sold land measuring 62 Kanals 12 Marlas to defendants No. 5 to 8 in the form of four separate sale deeds dated 2.1.1984, three were registered on 4.1.1984 and fourth on 18.4.1984 comprising land measuring 15 Kanals 13 Marlas for a sale consideration of Rs. 14,600/- each. The aforesaid sale deeds were executed in the names of individual defendants No. 5 to 8. Defendants No. 1 to 4 executed another sale deed dated 2.1.1984 registered on 14.8.1986 regarding other land measuring 35 Kanals 5 Marlas for sale consideration of Rs. 30,000/- in favour of defendant No. 9 in pursuance of Civil Court decree dated 8.4.1986 passed by Sr. Sub Judge, Kurukshetra in suit titled as Smt. Richhpal Kaur v. Smt. Surjit Kaur etc. In that decree dated 8.4.1986, a previous sale deed dated 24.7.1984 of land measuring 20 Kanals 8 Marlas earlier executed by Smt. Jagiro in favour of plaintiff was declared null and void. Therefore, it was claimed that suit for specific performance of Smt. Richhpal Kaur, defendant No. 9 which culminated into impugned decree dated 8.4.1986 was illegal and without merit and the subsequent agreement and sale deeds were alleged to be null and void in view of previously existing agreement of sale dated 21.7.1983 in favour of the plaintiff. It was also alleged that defendants No. 5 to 9 were in the knowledge of existence of agreement to sell dated 21.7.1983 but in spite of that, they got the agreement executed on 12.12.1983 as well as five sale deeds from defendants No. 1 to 4.
(3.) IN replication, the plaintiff reiterated the averments made in the plaint and denied those of the written statement. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the trial Court :