GURDIP SINGH Vs. TARA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NEITHER the respondent nor his counsel are present. On January 8, 1988 when this petition came up for hearing before me, the respondent was present in person. He refused to make reparation which might have persuaded me to take a lenient view of the matter. He refused to do so despite persuasion by his counsel. His counsel then sought time to argue the matter and this is how this petition has been placed before me today. In the absence of the counsel for the respondent, I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. A brief resume of the facts is necessary.

(2.) ON 16.11.1977, one Dhanna Singh executed an agreement to sell the land in dispute measuring 82 Kanals 9 Marlas to Satnam Singh and Pritam Singh for a consideration of Rs. 61,000/-. They paid earnest money amounting of Rs. 32,500/- to Dhanna Singh. Satnam Singh and Pritam Singh in turn executed an agreement for sale of the aforesaid land on 1.1.1972 to Gurdeep Singh and Gian Singh for the same amount of consideration. They received Rs. 26,200/- as earnest money. Later, however, fresh agreement to sell in respect of the same land was executed by Dhanna Singh in favour of Satnam Singh and Pritam Singh for the same amount of consideration on 23.6.1972. They paid to Dhanna Singh a further sum of Rs. 8,500/-. Thus the total earnest money paid to Dhanna Singh came to Rs. 41,000/-. Satnam Singh and Pritam Singh also executed a fresh agreement of sale on 23.6.1972. By this agreement they agreed to sell 1/3rd of the same to Piara Singh, Tara Singh, Karnail Singh and Jarnail Singh. These two sets of proposed vendees paid further amount of earnest money so that the total amount of earnest money so paid was Rs. 45,000/- in the following proportion :- Gurdeep Singh and Gian Singh Rs. 13,330.33 Piara Singh, Tara Singh, Karnail Singh and Jarnail Singh Rs. 26,616.66 The total consideration payable for the sale remained the same, i.e. Rs. 61,000/-. It needs mention here that in the agreement of the sale executed by Danna Singh in favour of Satnam Singh and Pritam Singh it was mentioned that the aforesaid proposed vendees could get the sale-deed executed either in their own name or in the name of anyone else. On 2nd July, 1973. Piara Singh, Tara Singh, Karnail Singh and Jarnail Singh got executed a sale-deed in their favour from Dhanna Singh in respect of 2/3rd of the land in dispute by paying a sum of Rs. 14,000/-, in addition to the earnest money of Rs. 26,616.66 paise, already paid by them. However, in violation of the agreement to sell dated 23rd June, 1972, Piara Singh, Tara Singh, Karnail Singh and Jarnail Singh got executed from Dhanna Singh another sale deed on 13.3.1974 in respect of the remaining 1/3rd of the property by paying to him a sum of Rs. 15,000/-.

(3.) NOTICE of the application on which ad interim order was passed was issued to the respondent. He appeared through his counsel on 16th February, 1987 and on a prayer made by him, the case was adjourned to 19th March, 1987. Ad interim injunction already issued was directed to continue.