BALWANT SINGH Vs. RAJARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by defendant Balwant Singh against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, Alwar, whereby he decreed the suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell agricultural land.

(2.) UNDER the provisions of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Permanent Allotment of Evacuee Agricultural Lands) Rules, 1963, hereinafter described as the Rules, the defendant, who was a non-claiment displaced person was allotted 14 bighas and 8 biswas of agricultural land situated at village Noornagar, tehsil Kishangarh, district Alwar, fully described in para 1 of the plaint. On 17-10 66 the defendant entered into an agreement to sell the said land to the plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 1000 per bigha and received Rs, 500 as earnest money. He also delivered possession of a portion of the land measuring 3 bighas 14 biswas of Khasra No. 256 to the plaintiff and further promised to execute a sale deed and get it registered in favour of the plaintiff on receipt of the residual consideration of money, after obtaining a sanad for the land from the government within 4 months from the date of the agreement. This agreement is Ex. 1 on the record. On the expiry of the period of 4 months, the plaintiff served a notice to the defendant and ultimately brought the suit out of which this appeal arises, for specific performance of the agreement Ex. 1, and claimed, in the alternative, damages to the tune of Rs. 14,800. The plaintiff averred in the plaint that he was all along ready and willing to perform his part of the contract to pay the balance of the consideration money, but the defendant deliberately and malafide did not deposit the instalments due to the Govt. and obtain the sanad with a view to avoid performance of the contract. In his written statement, the defendant denied the agreement all together and further pleaded that he being a non-claimant displaced person had no right to transfer the land without depositing the price of the land and other dues due to the Govt. According to the defendant, the transaction was null and void. On the pleadings of the parties, the learned Additional District Judge, who tried the suit, framed seven issues, but the material issues for the purposes of this appeal are issues Nos. 1 to 4 which run as under: "issues Nos. 1 to 4 (1) Whether on 17-10-66 the defendant entered into an agreement to sell agricultural land comprised in khasra Nos. mentioned in para No. 1 of the plaint @ Rs. 1000 per bigha and did the plaintiff pay Rs. 500 as advance money to the defendants as against the said agreement was executed in favour of the plaintiff and did the defendant agree to perform the contract within four months? (2) Whether in pursuance of the agreement to sell dated 17-10-66 the defendant delivered possession of the land comprised in khasra No. 256 to the plaintiff and is the plaintiff in its possession since that day? (3) Is the defendant a non-claimant displaced person and has no right to transfer allotted land and is the transaction of this nature null and void and is the present suit not maintainable on its basis? (4) In case issue No. 1 is decided in favour of the plaintiff, is the plaintiff entitled to decree for specific performance of the contract?" The learned Additional District Judge on a consideration of the evidence led by the parties found that the defendant did execute the agreement Ex. 1 and that he has also received a sum of Rs. 500 as earnest money and also delivered possession of the land comprised in Khasra No. 256 to the plaintiff on the date of the agreement. Dealing with issues Nos. 3 and 4, the learned Additional District Judge placed reliance on the cases, namely, Mrs. Chandnee Widya Vati vs. Dr. C. L. Katial (1), Ramulu vs. Anan-tharamulu (2) and Syed Jalal vs. Targopal Ram Reddy (3) and held that the agreement was not null and void or forbidden by law. On the above findings, he decreed the suit in the following manner: " The plaintiff's suit for specific performance of the contract dated 17-10-66 for the sale of the agricultural land measuring 14 bighas & 8 biswas mentioned in para 1 of the plaint is decreed and the defendant is directed to pay to the Government of Rajasthan the balance of the instalments of the price of the land together with interest due (if any) and all outstandings of the loans due against him and obtain sanad and a certificate of clearance and produce the same in this court within 2 months from this date and thereafter within 2 months convey the suit agricultural land by executing and getting registered a sale-deed of the said land in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant will further deliver possession of the suit agricultural land to the plaintiff. The plaintiff will deposit in this court the balance amount of Rs. 14,300 of the consideration money within 2 months from today. After the defendant has paid the full instalments of balance of price with interest (if any) and other outstandings of loans to the Government and after he has obtained the sanad and clearance certificate and has produced the same in court within the said time and has further executed and registered the sale deed of the land in favour of the plaintiff, the consideration amount of Rs. 14300 which is to be deposited by the plaintiff as aforesaid in court, shall be paid from out of the court to the defendant. In case the defendant fails to pay to the Government the full price of the land together with interest due (if any) and other outstandings of loans and to obtain the sanad and the clearance certificate and fails to produce the same in court within 2 months from today, the plaintiff will himself be entitled within 2 months thereafter to pay to the Government the said instalments of price along with interest (if any) and other outstandings of loans due against the defendant and to produce a clearance certificate and thereupon the plaintiff shall be entitled to get a sale-deed executed and registered in respect of the suit agricultural land through the court in his favour and he shall further be entitled to the refund of the amount of instalments of price and the amount of the other outstandings of loans with interest (if any) paid by him to the Government on behalf of the defendant from out of the consideration amount of Rs 14300 deposited by him and the remaining balance of the consideration amount only shall be paid to the defendant. If for any reason, the State Government refuses to accept the instalments of price and other outstandings either from the defendant or from the plaintiff and to give a clearance certificate and sanad, the plaintiff is, in the alternative, granted a decree for Rs. 8,640 as compensation and for Rs. 500 for return of advance money, in all for Rs. 9140 against the defendant. The plaintiff will get costs of this suit from the defendant. Decree be prepared accordingly. " Dissatisfied with the aforesaid decree, the defendant has preferred this appeal.

(3.) THE undertaking of the defendant that he shall obtain the sanad after depositing the amount due to the government is enforceable under the terras of the agreement even if the defendant had committed default in depositing the outstanding dues and in obtaining the sanad. Sec. 13 (b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 can usefully be referred to in this connection, which says that where the concurrence of other persons is necessary for valiating the title and they are bound to concur at the request of the vendor or lessor, the purchaser or lessee may compel him to procure such concurrence. I think the Court has power and jurisdiction under sec. 13 (b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, to compel the defendant to take steps and obtain the sanad in respect of the land agreed to be sold by him. THE learned Additional District Judge, in the circumstances, rightly passed a decree in the manner in which he did.