LAWS(PVC)-1933-7-20

DHARICHHAN SINGH Vs. MAHABIR SINGH

Decided On July 27, 1933
DHARICHHAN SINGH Appellant
V/S
MAHABIR SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by plaintiffs 1, 2 and 3 who had sued for specific performance of a contract into which, it is said, defendant 6 had entered with these plaintiffs to give them a mokarrari lease of 8 cottahs 6 dhoors of land. This land was part of an area of 16 cottahs 7 dhoors which was the site of a market in village Musehari. The landlords of the village were Shamnarain Singh and Basudeo Prasad Singh who each held eight annas and on partition between them in 1916 Basudeo Prasad Singh became exclusively entitled to 8 cottahs 1 dhoor and Shamnarain to 8 cottahs 6 dhoors of the market land. The share of Basudeo Prasad including 8 cottahs 1 dhoor of the bazar land was purchased by the plaintiffs on 21 May 1926.

(2.) The share of Shamnarain Singh including the 8 cottahs 6 dhoors of the bazar land was bought at an auction sale by defendant 6, Rambhawan Singh. The above facts are common ground. The plaintiffs alleged that Rambhawan in December 1927 entered into negotiations with the plaintiff and agreed to give them a mokarrari of these 8 cottahs 6 dhoors on a salami of Rs. 200, and a nominal rent of four annas a year; that this was agreed between the parties on 21 December 1927 and that a document embodying the agreement was executed on 22nd December 1927.

(3.) It is for specific performance of this agreement that the suit was brought. It is said that defendant 6 was at the time in need of money as certain property of his was being put up for sale in execution of a decree, the date fixed being 22nd December 1927. Defendant 6 at or about the same time was negotiating with Harbana Singh, defendant 5, to raise money by a usufructuary mortgage of his eight annas share in the village. On 22 December, 1927 stamp papers were bought by defendant 6 of which one bearing a stamp of Rs. 20 was destined for the usufructuary mortgage in favour of defendant 5 and the other bore a stamp of Rs. 2-8-0 and it was the plaintiffs case that this was intended for the execution of the mokarrari lease in their favour.