PUNITA BHARTI Vs. KIRPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the plaintiff's first appeal against the judgment and decree dated 11-10-2004 passed by the learned District Judge, Solan, H.P. in Civil Suit No. 3-S/1 of 2004, titled as Smt. Punita Bharti v. Shri Kirpal Singh dismissing her suit for recovery of money.

(2.) On 30-11 -1999 plaintiff (appellant) and defendant (respondent) entered into an agreement for sale of land comprised in Khasra No. 1167/731/4 measuring 552 square meters and Khasra No. 730 and 1166/731 measuring 815 square meters, situated in Mauja Deon, Tahsil and District Solan, H.P.

(3.) The sale consideration was fixed at Rs. 28,70,700/- and two sums being Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 1,50,000/- was received by the seller- defendant from the purchaser-plaintiff. In terms of the agreement, the sale deed was to be executed on 25-3-2000 when the balance sum was to be paid. According to the plaintiff, in spite of repeated assurances the defendant failed to construct a path and jeepable road to the land agreed to be sold to her. Finally legal notice dated 5-6-2003 was served upon the defendant, which was duly replied on 23-6-2003 wherein a totally false plea was taken to the effect that even though on the agreed date, the defendant waited for her in the office of the Sub-Registrar, the plaintiff had failed to come forward to execute the sale deed in .her favour, hence the earnest money stood forfeited. Thereafter plaintiff issued another notice. The cause of action accrued in favour of the plaintiff in the years 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 when the defendant kept on making the promises that he would be executing the sale deed after construction of path/road but however, it was only in the year 2003 when the plaintiff learnt that the defendant had sold pan of the land to third party, that the plaintiff filed the suit on 5-1-2004 for recovery of the amount paid to the defendant along with interest.