ASHOK KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. PURSHOTTAM BANSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants-Appellants are in the regular second appeal against the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the courts below while decreeing the suit for possession by way of specific performance of three agreements to sell (two agreements to sell dated 14.11.2006 and third one dated 15.11.2006) between the same parties.

(2.) The execution of the agreements and receipt of earnest money are not in dispute between the parties. The only issue, which was contested before the courts below was that on the extended target date, i.e. 12.6.2007, (whereas as per agreement to sell, the target date was 15.5.2007), the plaintiff had not come present to execute the sale-deeds, whereas it is the case of the plaintiff that he visited the office of the Sub Registrar, where sale-deed was to be executed and registered but the defendants did not come forward to execute and register the sale deeds. However, both the parties got their respective affidavits attested from the office of Sub Registrar on 12.6.2007, that is the extended target date to prove their respective presence in the premises of the office of Sub Registrar.

(3.) As per the agreement to sell, the defendants-appellants were required to take two steps as per agreements to sell before execution of the sale deeds:- (i) they were required to repay the loan which was standing as a charge on the land in dispute and (ii) apply and obtain No Objection Certificate from the District Town Planner. It is not in dispute that the defendants-appellants did not take any of the steps to comply with these two requirements, which were agreed between the parties.