Mukta Gupta, J.

1. Non performance of a 44 year old agreement resulting in filing of the suit and the present appeal has witnessed not only the original contracting parties but members of their next generations also expire, and thus, this Appeal has been flooded with endless applications for substitution of legal heirs of both the Appellants and the Respondents. The delay not only led to the legal heirs being substituted but also the Appellants assigning their rights to a third party in the present appeal against the impugned judgment and decree dated 3rd October, 1974 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court.

2. Brief facts relevant to the present appeal are that on 30th May/2nd June, 1966, Ram Lal Anand (hereinafter called "the vendor") entered into an agreement with one Keshav Swarup Bhatnagar (hereinafter called "the vendee") for the sale of his house No. 4-D, Ata-ur-Rehman Lane, Underhill Road, Delhi for a sum of Rs. 3,55,000/-. A sum of Rs. 30,000/- by way of cheque was paid as earnest money and the balance was to be paid at the time of registration of the sale deed or before by mutual agreement. The relevant portions of the agreement to sell Ex. P-203, entered into between the parties are:-

"WHEREBY the parties hereby mutually agreed as under:-

(1) The Vendor will sell that the purchaser will buy all that is denoted by Municipal No. 4-D Ata-ur-Rehman Lane, more fully described in the schedule annexed hereto with all the rights belonging or appurtenant thereto.

(2) The sale will be free from all encumbrances.

(3) That the vendor will procure the willingness and acceptance of his two sons or any other claimant regarding the gift of a portion of open land of the house said to have been executed in their favour of which the possession has not been given.

(4) The price will be Rs. Three lacs and fifty five thousand only of which Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) has been paid by way of earnest money through cheque No. D-48931 dated 2-6-1966 on the Mercantile Bank Ltd., Chandni Chowk, Delhi to the Vendor (receipt of which sum the vendor hereby acknowledges) and the balance shall be paid at the time of the registration of the registration of the sale deed or before by mutual agreement by means of a bank draft or pay order payable at any scheduled bank at Delhi.

(5) The Vendor has furnished the purchaser with full particulars of his title and possession. The demised property originally belonged to one Sheikh Sultan Ahmad Japanwala who conveyed it by a deed of sale dated 20th October, 1947 to R.B. Madho Prasad s/o Late R.B. Hardian Singh of Delhi; R.B. Madho Prasad thereafter in his turn sold the demised property to the Vendor's wife by means of a deed of sale dated 12th June, 1950 registered as No. 1949 in book No. 1 volume No. 2613 at pages 376 to 386. On first June 1950 the vendor alongwith his wife and family entered into possession of the demised property in pursuance of the said deed of sale. The demised property was purchased in the name of Shrimati Virawali wife of the Vendor who has since died. Property, however, always belonged to the vendor, a fact which is confirmed by the decree of the Civil court of which a true copy is enclosed.

(6) The present position as regards portions in personal possession and occupation of the Vendor and other persons is represented to be as follows:-

(a)

M/s Har Narain Gopi Nath as tenant in possession of 2 Garrages, 2 Bed Rooms and one drawing/dining room togetherwith 3 servants quarters at Rs. 425/- per month as rent on a monthly tenancy as also a dressing room, extra room and two bath rooms.

(b)

Mr. Parkash Chandra Jain as tenant in possession of 3 rooms and a gallery alongwith two servants quarters at Rs. 465/- per month as rent as also a dressing room, one extra room and a bath room.

(c)

Shri Pyare Lal son of Shri Bakshi Ram tenant in possession of annexe at Rs. 165/- per month.

(d)

Nine servant quarters out of a total of 14 are in possession of licensees whose particulars appear below:-

Name