PIRTHA SINGH Vs. LAXMAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Misc. Appeal has been directed against the order of learned Additional District Judge, Raisinghnagar dated 3-9-1998 by which he dismissed the application of the appellant under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, CPC.

(2.) Briefly stated, plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of contract against the defendants-respondents in relation to agreements executed on 16-1-1984, 15-6-1984 and 10-9-1984. Along with suit an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, CPC was submitted praying that the defendants be restrained from interfering in the possession of the plaintiff. Chak No. 28 ML in Tehsil Raisinghnagar was in the khatedari of Nahar Singh. Nahar Singh died on 16-1-1984. Defendant Laxman Singh was his successor and entered into an agreement to sell the same agricultural land at the rate of Rs. 17,000/- per bigha in relation to murabba No. 36. This agreement was made on behalf of Jagir Singh defendant No. 4. The other agreement relating to the remaining part of land was executed by him and an amount of Rs. 51,000/- was paid in advance. It was agreed that the possession of the land would be given on Baisakh-1 Samvat 2041 and it was also agreed that the registered sale deed could be executed on 4-6-1984. The defendant could not execute the sale deed till this date and ultimately this date was extended to 15-6-1984 as agreed between the parties. On 4-6-1984 defendant No. 1 told the plaintiff that the land was in the name of Jagsir Singh. Said Jagsir Singh had also come and he executed the agreement and put his signatures on it. Ultimately the said registration was to be done by 15-6-1984 but in the meantime Government of Rajasthan by a notification issued instructions that the land could be sold only with the permission of Colonisation Department. Thereupon the defendants agreed that the said permission will be obtained and thereafter registered sale deed would be executed within seven days. This was incorporated in the agreement on 15-6-1984. Later on a sum of Rs. 39,000/- was paid to the defendants on 10-9-1984. In all Rs. 90,000/- was paid by the plaintiff-appellant. But ultimately registered sale deed could not be executed and on 1-5-1997 defendant refused to perform his part of contract and intended to sell the said land to someone else.

(3.) The case of the defendants before the trial Court was that Nahar Singh during his lifetime bequeathed on 29-3-1976 by Will some land detailed in the reply to Jagsir Singh and Shiv Raj Singh who are his grandsons. Consequently the land was transferred in the name of these two respondents and jamabandi was also prepared in their names. Thus, it were they who were the khatedar tenants of this land. Agreement dated 16-1-1984 was denied and it was also denied that some advance money was taken. It was pleaded that the agreement was forged and without consideration. The endorsement on the back of agreement were also denied. It was pleaded that defendant-respondent Laxman Singh had no right or power to alienate the property of his minor sons. The agreement was void and that the land was not in possession of the plaintiff-appellant. Learned Additional District Judge, after hearing both the parties, dismissed the application.