KAILASH PRASAD SAH Vs. GOVIND DAS SHASTRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has arisen out of the order dated 24-9-1997 passed by the Sub-Judge VII, Bhagalpur, in T.S. No. 177/91, whereby and wherein the prayer of amendment made by the opposite party plaintiff has been allowed under Order VI, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the above mentioned suit for grant of a decree of specific performance on the basis of the contract/agreement of sale of the suit plots situated in mohalla Mundichak Gangadhar Banerjee Road, in the town of Bhagalpur. According to the plaintiff , defendant No. 1 being karta of the joint family executed a deed of Jarbeyananama on 21-3-1984 for sale of the suit land for a consideration of Rs. 31,000/- on condition that the document for sale shall be executed on or before 13-9-1991 and an advance payment of Rs. 21,000/- was received by him. Further case of the plaintiff is that on further demand made by the defendant No. 1, the plaintiff made a further payment of Rs. 2,000/- against the consideration amount on 3-8-1991. But, when the plaintiff made requests several times for executing the sale deed the defendant No. 1 did not pay head to it, even after lawyers notice being issued to defendant No. 1, then the above mentioned suit was filed, but during the pendency of suit defendant No. 1 transferred the suit land in favour of defendant No. 2 on 7-10-1991 by different sale deeds.

(3.) Written statement was filed by the defendants and all allegations made in the plaint were denied with the plea that the suit was not maintainable in its present form. It was further contended that the alleged Jarbeyananama was a forged and fabricated deed. Defendant No. 2 also filed his written statement stating that there was no such agreement between the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 and he is a bona fide purchaser without notice, and, as such, the suit is hit by Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act.