AMRIK SINGH Vs. DARSHAN SINGH
LAWS(P&H)-2019-10-91
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on October 19,2019

AMRIK SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
DARSHAN SINGH Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

PAWAN KUMAR GARG VERSUS HARBANS SINGH AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
PREM SINGH VS. BIRBAL [REFERRED TO]
RAMJI SINGH PATEL VS. GYAN CHANDRA JAISWAL [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

JAISHREE THAKUR,J. - (1.)The instant Regular Second Appeal has been filed seeking to challenge the judgment and decree of both the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Rajpura, whereby the suit for possession by way of specific performance filed by the respondent No.1/plaintiff has been allowed and the appeal filed before the first Appellate Court stands dismissed.
(2.)In brief, the facts are that the plaintiff/respondent No.1-- Darshan Singh (henceforth called as 'the plaintiff') filed a suit for specific performance alleging that he had entered into an agreement to sell dated 20.12.1996 with respondent No.2--Kanwar Chand. On the basis of the said agreement, 28 bighas of land situated in village Manjauli, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala was to be sold to the plaintiff by Kanwar Chand. The price 1 of 10 of the land was fixed at Rs.2.08 lakh for 4 bighas and total value of the land was fixed at Rs.14,56,000/-. out of which earnest amount of Rs.3.5 lakh was given at the time of execution of the agreement to sell. The sale deed was to be executed on 2.1.1999, but was not executed on the fixed date i.e. 2.1.1999. However, time was extended for execution of the sale deed to 1.5.2001 and an additional amount of Rs.70,000/- was handed over to Kanwar Chand when the date was extended. On 1.5.2001, Kanwar Chand showed his inability to get the sale executed and consequently the date was again extended to 28.12.2002. Another amount of Rs.50,000/- was given to Kanwar Chand on the said date. On 16.10.2002, the plaintiff came to know that Kanwar Chand had entered into another agreement dated 13.3.1997 with the defendants No. 2 and 3, who had filed a suit for specific performance of their agreement against Kanwar Chand and consequent to the said agreement, sale deed dated 13.5.1997 for 9 bighas of land had been executed. Consequently, the plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement dated 20.12.1996 and also sought permanent injunction restraining the defendant/appellant from alienating the suit land to any other person except the plaintiff.
(3.)At the outset, it is noticed that during the course of the proceedings before the trial court, defendants No.2 and 3 compromised the matter with defendant No.1 and consequently the suit filed by defendants No.2 and 3 was withdrawn.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.