RAM LAL AND ORS. Vs. SHRI BAJRANG LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant -appellants have preferred this Civil First Appeal under Sec. 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dt. 26.7.2008 passed by Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jhunjhunu in Civil Suit No. 72/2006 whereby the learned trial Court has decreed the suit for declaration, specific performance of agreement to sell and permanent injunction filed by the plaintiff -respondent. There is no dispute between the parties regarding following facts:

(2.) THE plaintiff -respondent filed the suit with the averment that defendant -appellant -Shri Ram Lal agreed to sell his undivided share in both the suit properties in sale consideration of Rs. 1,20,000/ - to plaintiff -respondent and remaining defendant -appellants and after receiving the aforesaid sale consideration from them, executed an agreement to sell on 2.8.2000 and also handed over possession of his share so sold to plaintiff - respondent and remaining defendant -appellants. According to plaintiff -respondent he paid his share of sale consideration of Rs. 30,000/ - in cash to Shri Ram Lal whereas each of the remaining purchasers also paid his respective share of the sale consideration. It was also averred in the plaint that since the date of execution of agreement to sell i.e. 2.8.2000, plaintiff -respondent and remaining defendant -appellants are cultivating the share of suit properties so sold by the defendant -appellant -Shri Ram Lal to them. According to plaintiff -respondent he is purchaser of 1/4th share of 1/5th share of Shri Ram Lal in suit property No. 1 and 1/4th share of 1/5th share in the suit property No. 2 and the defendant -appellant is bound by agreement to sell dt. 2.8.2000 and sell 1/4th share of his total share in both the suit properties to plaintiff -respondent and he is entitled for specific performance of the agreement to sell to that extent. It was also said in the plaint that both the release deeds dt. 14.6.2006 are void, invalid and ineffective to the extent of share so sold by Shri Ram Lal to plaintiff -respondent and they are liable to be declared so. Relief of permanent injunction was also sought in the suit.

(3.) THE learned trial Court after hearing both the parties and appreciating and evaluating the evidence available on record concluded as follows: