Honble SHARMA, J.–In a suit for declaration, possession and mandatory injunction instituted in respect of property in question by the plaintiff respondent on February 9, 1987, the defendant appellant did not choose to file written statement, even after the trial court kept the suit pending for a period of five and half years for this purpose only. The defendant appellant also failed to cross-examine the witnesses adduced by the plaintiff respondent and did not examine any witness on his behalf. Learned trial court on January 8, 2001 decreed the suit. Civil regular first appeal preferred by the defendant appellant was dismissed by the learned appellate has now filed the instant second appeal impugning the aforequoted findings of the courts below.

(2). Dr. Prakash Chand Jain, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, canvassed that the suit instituted by the respondent on the basis of the agreement dated December 1, 1985 stated to be made in his favour by one Shriniwas Vaidhya was not maintainable without seeking the relief of specific performance. The agreement was not admissible in evidence and on the basis of said document decree for declaration could not be passed. It was furth

Click Here to Read the rest of this document