MADAN LAL Vs. KAUSHLIYA DEVI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against order dated 18.1.14 passed by the District Judge, Merta City, whereby a revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 8.7.10 passed by the Debt Relief Court, Merta, rejecting the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 6 of Rajasthan Relief of Agriculture Indebtedness Act, 1957 (for short "the Act"), has been dismissed.

(2.) PRECISELY , the case of the petitioner is that he purchased a shop and a house adjacent thereto, from the first respondent -Smt. Kaushalya Devi for a consideration of Rs. 4 lacs by way of an agreement to sell dated 11.5.97. According to the petitioner, a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/ - was paid by him to the first respondent on the date of execution of the agreement to sell and thereafter, Rs. 1,00,000/ - was paid in two installments and thus, as against the consideration of Rs. 4,00,000/ -, he had already paid a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/ -. However, later, the house was sold by the first respondent to one Shri Likma Ram s/o Narayan Ram Khati and the shop to Madanlal s/o Narayan Ram. In these circumstances, the petitioner filed a suit for injunction inter alia against the first respondent before the Civil Judge (S.D.), Merta, which was contested by the first respondent by filing a written statement thereto. The factum of sale of the property in question and the execution of the agreement as alleged was specifically denied by the first respondent. On the basis of the pleading of the parties, the trial court framed the issues as under:

(3.) AFTER the dismissal of the suit for injunction as aforesaid, the petitioner filed an application under Section 6 of the Act before the Debt Relief Court, Merta City, for recovery of an amount of Rs. 3,50,000/ - alongwith interest @ 9%. The first respondent filed a reply to the application and at the same time, filed an application under Section 11 read with Order VII Rule 11 CPC, for rejection of the application on the ground that the issue raised regarding the execution of the agreement to sell having been decided by the court of competent jurisdiction, the application filed under Section 6 of the Act raising the same issue, is barred by principle of res judicata.