CHANDER SEN Vs. MANI RAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed under Sec. 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 31.12.1997, passed by the learned District Judge, Kullu, vide which he decreed the suit of the Original Respondent/Plaintiff, Mani Ram, now represented by the legal representatives for return of Rs. 1,00,000/ -, received by the Appellant as an earnest money.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the original Respondent Mani Ram (hereinafter referred to as 'Plaintiff') filed a suit for specific performance of contract as against the Appellant and others, who were impleaded as Defendants No. 1 to 4, respectively. It was alleged by the Defendant No. 1 that he had entered into agreement with the Plaintiff for sale of land, measuring 01 -06 -00 bigha, as detailed in the plaint and agreed to sell land out to the share of the Plaintiff for a consideration of Rs. 2,95,000/ -. Out of this amount, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/ - lac was paid by the Plaintiff to Defendant No. 1 at the time of execution of agreement to sell dated 4.4.1991. The remaining amount was agreed to be paid at the time of registration of the sale deed which was agreed to be executed by 31.8.1991. It was alleged that the Plaintiff gave intimation to Defendant No. 1 to get the sale deed executed who assured him that he would got the same registered. It was further alleged that the Plaintiff was always willing to perform his part of the contract but Defendant No. 1 failed to execute the sale deed inspite of various requests made by the Plaintiff. Thus, it was alleged that the Plaintiff is entitled to a sum of Rs. 78,000/ -, on account of damages by way of interest on the earnest money of Rs. 1,00,000/ - alongwith interest. It was further alleged that Defendant No. 1 had further sold his share in the land to Defendants No. 2, 3 & 4 vide different sale deeds which have been executed after the execution of agreement to sell in favour of the Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1 had no right to execute the sale deeds in favour of Defendants No. 2 to 4. Hence, suit for specific performance of contract filed by Plaintiff.

(3.) Defendant admitted to have executed the agreement and stated that the agreement was executed on 5.4.1991. He did not deny that sale was to be completed by 31.8.1991 but pleaded that the Plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. He admitted that sale consideration fixed was Rs. 2,95,000/ - and submitted that since Plaintiff had failed to get the sale deed executed, therefore, the earnest money stood forfeited.