ISHWAR AND ANOTHER Vs. KHADAG SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-defendants have filed the present regular second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 08.11.2017 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Karnal, whereby their appeal against the judgment and decree dated 21.11.2014 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal, was dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated, the respondent-plaintiff had filed a suit against the appellant-defendants, seeking a decree for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 23.05.2007. The consequential relief of joint possession and permanent injunction was also sought, inter-alia, on the grounds that the defendants being owners in possession of the land measuring 4 Kanals 0 Marla being 80/1660 share out of total land measuring 83 Kanals 0 Marla, as detailed in para No.1 of the plaint, had agreed to sell it along with right of path, trees and other rights appurtenant thereto in favour of the plaintiff for a total sale consideration of Rs.7 lakhs on 23.05.2007 in the presence of attesting witnesses. The agreement dated 23.05.2007 was attested by Shri Krishan Lal, Notary Public, Karnal and a sum of Rs.5 lakhs was paid as earnest money to the defendants in the presence of witnesses. A receipt in this regard was duly executed. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement, the target date for execution and registration of sale deed was fixed as 23.09.2007. However, the target date was further extended from 23.09.2017 to 15.02.2008, and then from 15.02.2008 to 27.03.2008 and lastly, from 27.03.2008 to 20.04.2008 with the mutual consent of the parties vide endorsements on the back side of the agreement.

(3.) As 20.04.2008 was a holiday, on the next day i.e. 21.04.2008, the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. Therefore, after due intimation to the defendants, he along with remaining sale consideration and amount of stamp charges etc. reached in the office of Sub Registrar, Karnal. He remained present in the office of Sub Registrar, Karnal but the defendants did not turn up. Thereafter, the plaintiff moved an application accompanying with an affidavit regarding his readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract before Sub Registrar, Karnal for getting his presence marked. He got his affidavit attested by Executive Magistrate on the same day. Thereafter, the plaintiff approached the defendants a number of times and requested them to perform their part of contract. A legal notice through his counsel was also given to the defendants on 07.07.2008 calling upon the defendants to perform their part of the contract within a period of 15 days from the receipt of date of notice, but despite receiving the notice, the defendants did not perform their part of the contract. Hence, the suit.