A party alleging an oral agreement for sale must prove its existence and payment through substantive evidence; failure to do so can lead to dismissal of the suit.

JUDGMENT :

ROMESH VERMA, J.

1. The present appeal arises out of the judgment and decree as passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sundernagar dated 29.04.2021, whereby the appeal preferred by the present appellant/plaintiff was dismissed and the judgment and decree as passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Court No.1 Sundernagar, Distt. Mandi, H.P dated 20.03.2020 was affirmed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/appellant filed a suit for specific performance of oral agreement to sell in the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Court No.1, Sundernagar, Distt. Mandi, H.P. on 19.03.2015. It was averred in the plaint that the defendants are recorded owners-in-possession of the land comprised in Khata Khatauni No.39 min/44, Khasra Nos. 96, 97, 103 and 104, measuring 03-02-01 bighas, situated in muhal Shakohar/181, Tehsil Sundernagar, Distt. Mandi, H.P. The defendants have sold the suit land to the plaintiff through an oral agreement to sell in the presence of the witnesses and in terms of the said agreement, the defendants received the entire sale consideration of Rs.1,40,000/- on 15.03.2000 from the plaintiff in the presence of the witnesses. Further, the possession of the suit land was handed over to the plaintiff and no document with respect to this transaction was recorded in writing.

3. Consequent upon the said agreement to sell, the plaintiff with the express and implied consent of the defendants is owner of the suit land and has planted apple plants over the suit land and covered its area through barbed wires and now the plaintiff is maintaining apple orchard planted by him.

4. In the last week of December 2014, the plaintiff requested the defendants to execute the Sale Deed in respect of the suit land, but the defendants did not pay any heed towards the request of the plaintiff, as such, legal notice for the execution of the Sale deed in favour of the plaintiff was served by the plaintiff on 31.01.2015. However, the same had no effect on the defendants.

5. It was further averred that the plaintiff is still ready to perform his part of the contract for execution of the Sale Deed in terms of the oral agreement. Therefore, it was prayed that the suit be decreed with costs and defendants be directed through a decree of specific performance of oral agreement to execute and register the Sale Deed in respect of the suit land in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.

6. Further, decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from causing unlawful interference in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit land was also prayed with further prayer that the defendants be also restrained from alienating or creating charge over the suit land in any manner.

7. The suit was contested by the defendants. Preliminary objections with respect to cause of action, locus standi, Court fee etc were taken in the written statement. On merits, all the averments as made in the plaint were refuted. It was stated that there was no occasion to sell the suit land in favour of the plaintiff. It was denied that there is any sale agreement between the parties. Neither any sale consideration of any kind has been received by the defendants nor the possession of the suit land has been handed over to the plaintiff. The apple orchard was planted is being maintained by the defendants, as such, the contents of the plaint are false, concocted and incorrect. Further, it was averred that th