MUNNI DEVI Vs. SUNITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present regular appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dtd. 29/7/2022 passed by the Additional District Judge, Bhadra, District Hanumangarh in Original Suit No.09/2016 (CIS No.09/2016), whereby the suit for specific performance of the contract as preferred by the plaintiffs has been decreed.

(2.) As per the plaint, the defendants Munni Devi and Sunil Kumar being the wife and son of Mangilal respectively, after his death on 1/5/2001, became the owners of the residential premises of which a lease had been issued in his favour. Besides the residential house, one shop was also registered in the name of defendant no.2-Sunil Kumar. On 3/12/2015, both the defendants executed an agreement to sell in favour of the plaintiffs qua both, the residential house as well as the shop for a consideration of Rs.9.00 lac and 11 lac respectively. The consideration amount of Rs.6.00lac each was paid to the defendants on the same date and it was agreed that the remaining consideration amount of Rs.8.00 lac would be paid on 18/7/2016, the date fixed for execution of the saledeed in favour of the plaintiffs. As the defendants did not execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs, the present suit was preferred with a relief for specific performance of the contract.

(3.) Written statement was filed jointly by the defendants and the factum of agreement to sell dtd. 3/12/2015 was specifically denied. The case of the defendants was that neither the agreement to sell was entered into between the parties nor any consideration was received by the defendants qua the alleged agreement. It was averred that the said document as well as the signatures of the defendants were forged. The plea regarding the agreement being insufficiently stamped and unregistered were also raised. On the basis of the pleadings as made, the Court framed as many as 6 issues as under : <IMG>JUDGEMENT_262_LAWS(RAJ)5_2023_1.jpg</IMG>