SH. GHASITU Vs. SH. GANDHARAV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Plaintiff's suit for rendition of a decree, for, specific performance of agreement executed, on 18.11.1993, inter se him and the defendant, was dismissed, by the learned trial Court, and, in an appeal preferred therefrom by the aggrieved plaintiff, before, the learned First Appellate Court, the latter Court allowed the appeal, and, consequently decreed the plaintiff's suit. Now the defendant is aggrieved therefrom, hence, has motioned this Court.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiffs had instituted a suit for specific performance of the agreement of 18.11.1993, executed by the defendant, in his favour qua the land depicted therein. The plaintiff averred that defendant had approached him on 18.11.1993 and demanded a sum of Rs. 20,000.00 from him for the marriage of his son. IN lieu of this sum of Rs. 20,000.00, he had agreed to sell the suit land to him and executed the agreement to sell in his favour qua the suit land. It is averred that the entire sale consideration of Rs. 20,000.00 was paid to the defendant on the same day and the possession of the suit land was handed over to the plaintiff by the defendant on that very day. It was also agreed that in case the defendant failed to, within the stipulated period, execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff, he shall pay a sum of Rs. 80,000.00 to the defendant. It is averred that despite many requests made by the plaintiff to the defendant to get the sale deed executed, but all his attempts failed and on the contrary, the defendant got a case registered against him in the Police Station, Jawali. It is averred that a legal notice of 6.10.2000, was served upon the defendant which has been received by him on 18.10.2000, but he had not replied the same. Hence, he has filed the instant suit for specific performance of contract against the defendant.

(3.) The defendant contested the suit and filed written statement, wherein, he has taken preliminary objections, inter alia maintainability, locus standi, cause of action etc. He averred that the suit of the plaintiff is time barred and that he had never executed any agreement to sell qua the suit property in favour of the plaintiff. He has denied all the averments as cast in the plaint by the defendant, hence, prayed that the suit of the plaintiff be dismissed.