SHANTI DEVI Vs. PRITAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dtd. 30/11/2018 passed by learned District Judge, Solan, vide which the appeal filed by the appellant (defendant before the learned Trial Court) was dismissed. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to as in the same manner as they were referred before the learned Trial Court for convenience).

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the plaintiff filed a Civil Suit before learned Trial Court for seeking specific performance of the Agreement dtd. 15/5/2010 regarding the half share of the land measuring 2 Bigha 2 Biswa bearing Khasra No.1227, comprised in Khata Khatauni No.266/273 situated in Village Bhud, Pargana Dharampur, Tehsil Baddi, District Solan, as per the copy of the Jamabandi for the year 2008-09. A consequential relief of permanent prohibitory injunction for restraining the defendant from alienating or encumbering the suit land in any manner, whatsoever till the execution and registration of the sale deed was also sought. It was pleaded that the defendant is the owner of the suit land. She entered into an agreement to sell the same to the plaintiff on 15/5/2010 at Nalagarh at the rate of Rs.6,00,000.00 per bigha for a total consideration of Rs.6,30,000.00. She received Rs.1,30,000.00 from the plaintiff as earnest money. The balance amount was to be paid on or before 14/9/2010 at the time of the registration of the sale deed. The plaintiff remained present in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Baddi from 10:00 am till 5:00 pm with documents, remaining sale consideration of Rs.5,00,000.00 and expenses for execution and registration of the sale deed. However, the defendant did not visit the office of the Sub-Registrar to perform her part of the agreement. The defendant served a notice upon the plaintiff stating that she remained present in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Nalagarh; however, the plaintiff had not appeared before the Sub-Registrar. The plaintiff sent a reply stating that he remained present in the office of the Sub-Registrar,Baddi, where the sale deed was to be executed. He asked the defendant to be present in the office of Sub-Registrar Baddi on 20/10/2010 for the execution of the sale deed. However, the defendant did not appear. The plaintiff is ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. The defendant is threatening to alienate the suit land to some other person; hence, the suit was filed to seek the relief mentioned above.

(3.) The suit was opposed by filing a written statement denying the contents of the plaint. However, it was admitted that the defendant had agreed to sell the suit land to the plaintiff for a sale consideration of Rs.6,30,000.00. She also admitted that the plaintiff paid Rs.1,30,000.00 to her and the remaining amount of Rs.5,00,000.00 was to be paid to the defendant on or before 14/9/2010. She asserted that she was an illiterate and rustic lady.