KULJIT SINGH Vs. SUKHDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No. 7236-37-CII of 2009 Civil Miscellaneous application is allowed subject to just exceptions. Documents attached with this application are taken on record. CM disposed of. Civil Revision No. 1425 of 2009 This is defendants' revision petition challenging the order dated 24.01.2009 passed by Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.), Amritsar, whereby amendment application filed by respondent No. 1 and 2 (plaintiffs) for converting their suit of permanent injunction into a suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell, has been allowed.

(2.) AS per the averments made in this petition, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed a civil suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from selling/alienating the property in dispute to any other person other than the plaintiffs. In this suit the plaintiffs averred that defendants had entered into an agreement regarding sale of the said property to the plaintiffs for the total sale consideration of Rs. 46,25,000/- and they had executed agreement of sale dated 18.12.2005 in this respect in their favour and had received in advance Rs. 10 lacs as earnest money/part payment from the plaintiffs. The remaining sale consideration was agreed to be paid by the plaintiffs to the defendants at the time of execution and registration of the sale deed and the date for this purpose was fixed as 18.08.2006. It was also submitted that at the time of execution of agreement to sell, the possession of a part of the property was delivered by the defendants to the plaintiffs in part performance of the agreement to sell and the plaintiffs were in actual physical possession of the same and possession of the remaining property was to be delivered by the defendants to the plaintiffs at the time of execution and registration of the sale deed on the stipulated date. It was further the case of the plaintiffs that they came to know that to defeat the rights of the plaintiffs in the suit property the defendants were trying to alienate the suit property in favour of some other persons other than the plaintiffs for which they had got no right. It was also stated that the plaintiffs had always been ready and willing to perform their part of the contract for making payment of the balance sale consideration to the defendants as was agreed to between the parties and in regard to the other necessary expenses but the stipulated date for registration and execution of the sale deed i.e.18.08.2006 was yet to mature and therefore they filed the suit for permanent injunction against the defendants. In their plaint dated 01.02.2006 the plaintiffs also stated that cause of action accrued to them two days earlier when the defendants refused to honour the agreement to sell executed by them and threatened to alienate the suit property to some other persons ignoring the agreement to sell in their favour.

(3.) THE trial Court vide impugned order dated 26.02.2009 allowed the aforesaid amendment application of the plaintiff-respondents.