HAKIM SAIYAD ABDULLAH Vs. SAIYAD AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract of sale, and for a declaration that, the sale-deed dated the 12 of January, 1925, executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of defendants Nos. 2 and 3 is null and void as against the plaintiff.,

(2.) The plaintiff's case was that defendant No. 1 contracted to sell his 1 anna 7 ganda:, and odd share in Mauza Dharamsipur to the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 1,925 and, on receipt of R9. 99 by way of earnest money, on the 26 of December, 1924, executed an agreement embodying the terms of the contract and promised to execute the sale-deed on the 5 of January, 1925, but notwithstanding the said contract defendant No. 1 sold 17 1/2 gandas share to defendants Nos. 2 and 3 fore a sum of Rs. 2,700 on the 12 of January, 1925.

(3.) The suit was contested by all the defendants. The case put forward by the defendants was that, prior to the agreement alleged by the plaintiff, defendant No. 1 had on the 17 of November, 1924, agreed to sell his 1 anna 7 gandas and odd share to defendants Nos. 2 and 3, and that the plaintiff had knowledge of the said agreement. The defendants alleged that the sale of the 12 of January, 1925, was in pursuance of the agreement dated the 17 of November, 1924, that was prior in date to the agreement alleged by the plaintiff, and, as such, the plaintiff was not competent to assail the validity of the sale-deed in favour of defendants Nos. 2 and 3. Defendant No. 1 also pleaded that the plaintiff had induced defendant No. 1 to enter into the contract of sale by the exercise of fraud and as such the plaintiff is not entitled to a decree even with respect to the 10 gandas share that remained with defendant No. 1 and was not included in the sale-deed executed by him in favour of defendants Nos. 2 and 3.