OM PARKASH Vs. MADHU CHANDEL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal, appellant/plaintiff has challenged the judgment and decree passed by the Court of learned District Judge, Solan, Camp at Nalagarh, in Civil Appeal No. 6-NL/13 of 2007 dated 16.01.2008, vide which learned Appellate Court while partly setting aside the judgment and decree passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nalagarh, in Civil Suit No. 162/1 of 2004 dated 30.04.2007, decreed the suit of the appellant/plaintiff partly, by holding the appellant/plaintiff to be entitled for decree for recovery of Rs.70,000/- from respondents/defendants with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of payment till its realization with proportionate costs.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff), filed a suit for specific performance of contract dated 15.11.2002 and in the alternative, suit for damages on the grounds that the defendants were owners in possession of the suit land measuring 1 Bigha 8 Biswas being 1/3rd share of total land measuring 4 Bighas 4 Biswas comprised in Khata/Khatauni Nos. 62min/62min, bearing Khasra No. 560 (4-4), situated in village Nangal Nihla, Pargana Plassi, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan and the plaintiff was interested to purchase the suit land and as defendants agreed to sell the said land to the plaintiff for a total sale consideration of Rs.98,000/-, accordingly an agreement to sell was reduced into writing on 15.11.2002 which was duly signed by the parties in the presence of the attesting witnesses. As per the plaintiff, a sum of Rs.70,000/- was paid as earnest money to the defendants at the time of execution of said agreement to sell on 15.11.2002 and it was agreed between the parties that the remaining amount of Rs.28,000/- shall be paid on or before 15.01.2003 and that the defendants will execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff on or before 15.01.2003.

(3.) Defendants contested the suit and in the written statement took the stand that the consideration amount of sale agreement was not paid to the defendants and in fact, no agreement to sell was executed or signed by the defendants. As per averments made in the written statement, defendants had not agreed to sell their share to plaintiff. It was denied by the defendants that in November, 2002 an amount of Rs.28,000/- was also received by them from the plaintiffs as was pleaded by the plaintiff. The execution of sale agreement between the parties was denied and it was further stated in the written statement that if the sale agreement had been executed by the plaintiff himself, in that event the same was not binding on the defendants.