RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

1. The appeal impugns the judgment and decree (dated 15th December, 1990 of the Court of the Additional District Judge, Delhi in Suit No.326/1981 filed by the deceased respondent/plaintiff against the appellant/defendant) of specific performance of the Agreement dated 28th July, 1962 of sale by the appellant/defendant of land admeasuring 41 bighas and 16 biswas situated at Village Chattarpur, Delhi to the deceased respondent/plaintiff.

2. Notice of the appeal was issued and vide ex-parte ad-interim order dated 21st February, 1991, the execution of the Sale Deed in pursuance to the decree was stayed. Vide order dated 12th March, 1991, the Trial Court records were requisitioned. One of the legal heirs of deceased respondent/plaintiff namely Smt. Hanso Devi died during the pendency of the appeal and her name was deleted from the array of respondents. On 2nd February, 1995, the appeal was admitted for hearing and the earlier interim order was made absolute till the decision of the appeal. On 19th November, 2008, when the appeal came up for hearing, the same was dismissed in default. However, on application made by the appellant/defendant, the same was vide order dated 25th February, 2009 restored to its original position. Another legal heir of the deceased respondent/plaintiff namely Smt. Savitri Devi also died during the pendency of the appeal and her legal heirs were substituted vide order dated 30th July, 2010. The parties were vide order dated 24th January, 2011 referred to mediation which though remained pending till 22nd October, 2013, failed. The counsels for the parties have been heard.

3. The deceased respondent/plaintiff, on 23rd October, 1963, instituted the suit from which this appeal arises, pleading:

(i) that the appellant/defendant being a displaced person was permanently allotted land bearing Khasra Nos.1657, 1658, 1659, 1666, 1672 to 1675 and 1116 total admeasuring 41 bighas and 16 biswas at Village Chattarpur, Delhi;

(ii) that a Sanad/Certificate in respect of the transfer and allotment of the said land was to be issued by the Ministry of Rehabilitation on payment of Rs.2100/-;

(iii) that the appellant/defendant vide Agreement to Sell dated 28th July, 1962 agreed to sell the entire land to the deceased respondent/plaintiff at the rate of Rs.2500/- per acre;

(iv) that it was agreed that the appellant/defendant shall execute the Sale Deed within one month from the date of receipt of obtaining the Sanad from the Ministry;

(v) that the said Sanad was not issued as the amount of Rs.2100/- was not deposited by the appellant/defendant, even though the appellant/defendant at the time of execution of the Agreement to Sell had received a sum of Rs.2500/- from the deceased respondent/plaintiff as earnest money;

(vi) that the appellant/defendant had further agreed that in case he failed to get the Sanad executed or execute the Sale Deed in favour of the deceased respondent/plaintiff, the deceased respondent/plaintiff shall be at liberty to get the Sale Deed executed through the Court of Law at the cost of the appellant/defendant;

(vii) that the appellant/defendant thereafter deposited the amount due to the department but still did not obtain the Sanad or execute the Sale Deed in favour of the deceased respondent/plaintiff and on the contrary started dealing with other persons for sale of the land for a higher price;

(viii) that the deceased respondent/plaintiff thus filed a suit for injunction to restrain the appellant/defendant from doing so;

(ix) that the appellant/defendant in the said suit for injunction stated that he had not been granted the Sanad and he will not commit any breach of the contract; on his said statement, the suit for injunction was withdrawn;

(x) that however the appellant/defendant again threatened to commit breach of contract and though was bound to take delivery of the Sanad from the department of Rehabilitation and to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the deceased res