The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to specific performance of a contract for the sale of immovable properties, based on the validity and enforceability of the agreement, the individual and separate nature of ancestral property, and the absence of valid defenses against specific performance.

Kuldip Chand Sood, J.—Hari Singh, the plaintiff herein, has filed this suit against the defendant for specific performance of the contract dated March 27, 1997 for executing the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the following properties: (i) Land measuring 1-18-06 Hects. comprised in Khasra Nos. 172, 173 and 180, Khatouni No. 102, Khata No. 32/30, Kita 3, situate in mohal Sihal Upperli, mauza and Tehsil Fatehpur, District Kangra, as shown in the jamabandi for the year 1994-95 ; (ii) Land measuring 0-79-43 Hects., comprised in Khata/Khatouni number 3, Khasra Nos. 188, 359/189, 276, 284, 285, 289, 290, 368/291, 293, 295, 370/304, kitas 11, situate in Mohal Lohara mauza and Tehsil Fatehpur, District Kangra, as shown in the Jamabandi for the year 1994-95; and (iii) Two houses one cow-shed, that is, one kutcha slate posh residential house, with four rooms, two verandahas, one in front and the other on the eastern side of the house, and one pucca house, slate posh, consisting of two rooms and one cow-shed (kutcha) slate posh. All these structures are situate on Khata No. 107 min (100), Khatouni No. 263 min, Khasra number 171, measuring 0-10-53 Hects., Gair Mumkin Abadi, as shown in the jamabandi for the year 1994-95 and tatima, pertaining to mauza Fatehpur, District Kangra.

2. The case of the plaintiff, as disclosed in the plaint is: The defendant was the owner in possession of the land detailed in sub-paras (i) to (iii) above, suit property for short. On March 27, 1997, the defendant executed an agreement with the plaintiff whereby he agreed to sell the property in dispute to the plaintiff for a consideration of rupees 6.25 lakhs. Out of the total consideration of rupees 6.25 lakhs, a sum of rupees 50,000 were paid by the plaintiff to the defendant as advance at the time of execution of the agreement. The amount of rupees 50,000 was paid by the plaintiff to the defendant by transfer of this amount from his Bank Account to that of defendants account No. 809 with State Bank of India, Fatehpur Branch of Kangra District in Himachal Pradesh.

3. By this agreement, the defendant was required to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the "suit property" on or before June 10, 1997. The balance sale consideration of rupees 5.75 lakhs was to be paid to the defendant on the date of execution of the agreement.

4. The plaintiff was always ready and willing and is still ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement by paying the balance sale consideration of rupees 5.75 lakhs to the defendant but the defendant inspite of the requests of the plaintiff, avoided to execute the sale deed, on one pretext or the other, on or before June 10, 1997, the stipulated date in the agreement. On June 10, 1997, plaintiff specifically requested the defendant to execute the sale deed as that was the last day for the execution of the registered sale deed and further requested him to accompany him to Tehsil headquarters for that purpose. The defendant, on the request of the plaintiff, accompanied him to Tehsil Headquarters at Fatehpur but on reaching Fatehpur, he started avoiding: plaintiff and did not execute the sale deed in accordance with the agreement. In view of the failure of the defendant to execute the sale deed, on June 10, 1997, the plaintiff moved an application before the Naib Tehsildar, Fatehpur explaining him the situation and his willingness to perform his part of the contract by paying the balance sale consideration of rupees 5.75 lakhs. The defendant, who was present in the Tehsil premises, was called by the Naib Tehsildar. Ultimately, the defendant prayed for ten days extension of time to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. The said request was accepted and time was extended for the execution of the sale deed till June 23, 1997.

5. On June 23, 1997, the plaintiff, the defendant and his son, namely, Kulbir Singh appeared before the Naib Tehsildar. The defenda