JUDGMENT :

These two appeals arise out of common judgments and decrees passed by the learned Courts below, hence are taken up together for decision. RSA No. 517 of 2010 is plaintiff’s appeal whereas RSA No. 499 of 2010 is defendant No.1’s appeal.

Defendants No. 1 & 2 are sons of late Smt. Gurbax Kaur. Smt. Gurbax Kaur, defendant No. 2 and daughters of Smt. Gurbax Kaur had executed a General Power of Attorney (in short GPA) in favour of defendant No. 1 on 09.03.1981. Plaintiff’s case was that defendant No. 1 acting as GPA of his mother, on 11.09.2001 executed an agreement to sell the suit land to the plaintiff for a sale consideration of Rs.75,000/-. Earnest money of Rs.10,000/- was received by Smt. Gurbax Kaur and Rs.30,000/- was received by defendant No.1 towards sale consideration. Instead of executing the sale deed in plaintiff’s favour, Smt. Gurbax Kaur sold the suit land in favour of defendant No. 2 vide a registered sale deed on 28.12.2001. In his written statement, defendant No. 1 supported plaintiff’s case in entirety but did not step into the witness box. Defendant No. 2 vehemently contested plaintiff’s case and called the suit to be collusive between plaintiff and defendant No. 1. Learned trial Court decreed the suit on 16.03.2009. Learned First Appellate Court on 16.08.2010 reversed the decree and dismissed the suit. Plaintiff was, however, held entitled to recover Rs.30,000/- from defendant No. 1. Aggrieved against dismissal of his suit, plaintiff has preferred RSA No. 517 of 2010. Defendant No. 1 has filed RSA No. 499 of 2010 against the common judgment and decree, whereby he has been held liable to pay Rs.30,000/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of institution of suit till its realization to the plaintiff.

2. Brief facts may now be noticed :-

2(i) A civil suit was instituted by the appellant for (i) possession through specific performance of an agreement to sell, dated 11.09.2001 of land comprised in Khewat No. 595, Khatauni No. 646, Khasra Nos. 1540, 1541 and 1542, measuring 114.86 square meters, situated at village Santoshgarh, Tehsil and District Una, H.P.; (ii) declaration that sale deed dated 28.12.2001 executed in favour of defendant No. 2 with respect to the suit land is illegal, null and void.

The factual foundation pleaded in the plaint was that defendant No. 1 (respondent No. 1) was the GPA of his mother Smt. Gurbax Kaur, his brother Ashok Kumar (defendant No. 2) and his sisters (non parties to the suit). Smt. Gurbax Kaur was owner in possession of the suit land. In July, 2001, the defendants alongwith their mother approached the plaintiff to sell the suit land. A consensus was arrived on 09.07.2001 regarding purchase of suit land by the plaintiff for a total sale consideration of Rs.75,000/-. A sum of Rs.10,000/- was paid by the plaintiff as earnest money on 09.07.2001. A sum of Rs.5,000/- was paid on 07.08.2001. Rs.5,000/- was also advanced on 21.08.2001 towards sale consideration. At the time of payment of further amount of Rs.20,000/- an agreement to sell the suit land was executed in plaintiff’s favour on 11.09.2001 by defendant No. 1 as the general power of attorney on behalf of his mother. The plaintiff pleaded that the defendants and their mother received total amount of Rs.40,000/- towards total sale consideration of Rs.75,000/-. The plaintiff was ready and willing to pay the balance sale consideration amount of Rs.35,000/-, however, the mother of the defendants died in February, 2002. The sale deed was not executed in plaintiff’s favour. After issuing legal notice to the defendants on 29.08.2002, the plaintiff inspected the revenue record and became aware of the fact that sale deed of suit land had already been executed by late Smt. Smt. Gurbax Kaur in favour of her son i.e. defendant No. 2 on 28.12.2001.

In the backdrop of above facts, plaintiff instituted the suit for specific performance of agreement dated 11.09.2001 and for declaration that the sale deed dated 28.12.2001 and cons