JAYANT NATH, J.

1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit seeking specific performance of Agreement to Sell dated 12.10.2007. As per the plaint the defendant is the Karta of M/s. Chander Mohan Kalra, HUF and owner of property C-36, Inderpuri, New Delhi which is a plot measuring 500 sq.yards. The property was bought by the father of the defendant on 4.2.1966. The father of the defendant died on 23.4.2002 leaving behind a Will dated 5.3.1984. The defendant filed a Probate Petition where he was granted the probate by judgment dated 19.4.2006. The sisters of the defendant had filed their No Objection Affidavits. The defendant is a permanent resident of USA.

2. It is stated that in August 2007, a property dealer Shri Vijay Gupta made an offer for sale of the suit property to the plaintiffs. Pursuant to negotiations with the defendant a sale price of Rs.2.40 crores was agreed upon. It is pleaded that the defendant handed over copies of all past sale deeds, Will dated 5.3.1984, probate petition and the entire records. On 16.8.2007 the plaintiffs got prepared from Citi Bank in the name of the defendant a draft for Rs.5 lacs but the defendant was not available. The parties met on 8.10.2007 whereby the defendant received the draft on account of token money towards the sale. He gave a receipt. It is also stated that the defendant handed over the copies of the Power of Attorney in his favour sent by his sons, namely, Shri Vinit Kalra and Shri Sunil Kalra from USA giving no objection for the sale of the suit property. On 12.10.2007 an Agreement to Sell was executed which is said to have been signed by the defendant as Karta with a rubber stamp affixed on each page. The plaintiff is also said to have paid in cash another sum of Rs.5 lacs. Hence, the defendant is said to have received a total sum of Rs.10 lacs. Another sum of Rs.40 lacs was to be paid within one month. Balance money was to be paid within six months i.e. 11.4.2008.

3. Sometimes in August 2007 the plaintiffs had also applied to HDFC Limited for grant of a Housing Loan of over Rs.2 crores, which was approved on 27.9.2007.

4. For the purpose of payment of Rs.40 lacs which was payable on or before 11.11.2007 in terms of the Agreement to Sell dated 12.10.2007, the plaintiffs got two demand drafts prepared from Citi Bank, for Rs.30 lacs and Rs.10 lacs each. The demand drafts were handed over to the defendant as Karta but the defendant asked the plaintiffs to pay the total balance of Rs.2,30,00,000/- at the time of execution of the Sale Deed which was agreed to be executed on or before 11.4.2008 The defendant stated that he was in the process of opening a bank account in the name of Chander Mohan Kalra, HUF and that he has not made any arrangements for receiving such a large amount of money as yet and, therefore, he did not accept the draft of Rs.40 lacs. The defendant thereafter left for USA. It is pleaded that the plaintiffs regularly contacted the defendant requesting him to receive the balance sum as the housing loan had already been approved. The defendant failed to perform his contract. On 20.5.2008 the plaintiffs are said to have learnt that the property dealer had been asked to find out some other buyer for Rs.3 crores in respect of the suit property.

5. It is pleaded that the plaintiff has always been ready and willing and is still ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. Hence, the present suit.

6. Defendants have filed the written statement. It has been pleaded in the written statement that the plaintiffs have forged the Agreement to Sell dated 12.10.2007 which was never executed by the defendant and have also made insertions in the receipt dated 8.10.2007 for Rs.5 lacs. It is stated that it was Mr. Vijay Gupta the property dealer who informed the defendant that one party desperately wants to buy the property and to show his bona fide they have prepared a pay order of Rs.5 lacs in favour of the defendant and that the entire sale consideration would be