SURJIT Vs. KASHMIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 29.5.2010 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gurdaspur whereby suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff for possession by way of specific performance of agreement dated 20.6.2002 in respect of land measuring 1 kanal was partly decreed by allowing alternative relief of recovery of earnest money i.e. Rs. 66,000/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of agreement i.e. 20.6.2002 till realization and findings of the trial court have been affirmed by the Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur.

(2.) The sole submission made by counsel for the appellant is that one of the attesting witnesses to the agreement of sale namely Roop Lal PW2 in his cross examination has admitted that there was no transaction of giving/taking of money in his presence, therefore, plea of the respondent/plaintiff that an amount of Rs. 66,000/- was paid to the appellant at the time of execution of agreement dated 20.6.2002 becomes doubtful.

(3.) Before adverting to the submissions made by counsel for the appellant, it is appropriate to recapitulate that the second appeal can be entertained and decided if the same gives rise to a question of law that requires adjudication. Equally settled is that civil disputes are to be decided on the basis of preponderance of probabilities.