LAWS(P&H)-2009-5-81

RAM SINGH Vs. SATBIR

Decided On May 28, 2009
RAM SINGH Appellant
V/S
SATBIR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgments and decrees dated 25.4.2008 and 5.9.2008 passed respectively by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurgaon (hereinafter described as 'the trial Court') and the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon (referred to hereinafter as 'the First Appellate Court') whereby the suit of the plaintiffs-respondents was decreed and the appeal of the defendant-appellant was dismissed.

(2.) THE respondents filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance in respect of the suit land as detailed in the plaint on the basis of the agreement to sell dated 21.6.2001. The total sale consideration was stated to have been fixed at Rs. 1,40,000/- and a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was paid to the appellant as earnest money in the presence of witnesses on the date of agreement and the sale deed was agreed to be executed and registered on or before 20.11.2001. It was also agreed that in case the respondents failed to perform their part of contract, the earnest money shall stand forfeited, whereas in case the appellant failed to do so, they were given a right to get the sale deed executed and registered through Court of law at his cost. The appellant was alleged to have failed to execute the sale deed despite the legal notice having been served upon him by the respondents and despite the fact that they remained present whole day in the office of Sub Registrar, Farrukh Nagar along with balance sale consideration and other miscellaneous expenses. The respondents also got themselves marked present and obtained a certificate in this regard from the office of Sub Registrar.

(3.) THE parties went to trial on the following issues :- 1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 21.6.2001 in respect of the suit land ? OPP 2. Whether suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable in the present form ? OPD 3. Whether the plaintiffs are estopped from filing the present suit by their own act and conduct ? OPD 3 (a) Whether the partition proceedings qua the suit land have already been concluded, if so its effect ? OPD 4. Relief.