Mr. Shekher Dhawan, J.:- Present Regular Second Appeal is directed against the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff (respondent herein) for specific performance of agreement of sale, dated 01.07.1982 was decreed by the Court of first instance vide judgment and decree dated 15.11.1985, and the appeal filed by appellants-defendants was also dismissed by learned District Judge, Sangrur vide judgment and decree dated 14.01.1988.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties are being referred to as per their status before the Court of first Instance.

3. Facts relevant for the purpose of decision of this appeal; that plaintiff, Bhag Singh had filed a suit for specific performance of agreement f sale, dated 01.07.1982 in respect of agricultural land measuring 8 bighas 15 biswas comprising in Khata/Khatoni No.311/480, 481, Khasra No.110 min/2-19, 112 min/2-17 and 11 min/2-19, situated in the revenue estate of village Ferozepur Kuthala (hereinafter referred to as ‘the suit land’). As per the plaintiff, Kaushalya Devi, defendant No.1 is owner in possession of the suit land and she had agreed to sell the suit land for a sum of Rs.26,250/- and received Rs.17250/- at the time of execution of agreement dated 01.07.1982 and a sum of Rs.9000/- was to be paid to the mortgagee Kartar Kaur wife of Teja Singh. The sale deed was to be executed on 08.06.1983. It was also stipulated in the agreement that in case defendant No.1 failed to perform her part of contract, the plaintiff would be at liberty to get the sale deed executed from defendant No.1 through due process of law. The plaintiff had been ready and willing to perform his part of contract. There were sufficient resources with the plaintiff to meet the expenses for registration of the sale deed. However, defendant No.1, with mala fide intention, tried to back-out of the contract and failed to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. Thereafter, defendant No.1 sold one half share of suit land to defendant No.2, Harnek Singh, vide sale deed dated 28.12.1983 and the said sale deed is null and void and ineffective qua the rights of the plaintiff. Request was made to defendant No.1 to get the sale deed executed in terms of the agreement dated 01.07.1982, but to no effect.

4. Defendant No.1 contested the suit on the ground that she had neither received a sum of Rs.17,250/- from the plaintiff. In fact, defendant No.1 had borrowed certain amount from the plaintiff and at that stage the plaintiff had obtained her thumb impressions on certain blank papers with respect to loan. The loan was to be repaid on or before 08.06.1983 alongwith interest. The said loan was repaid, but the plaintiff refused to issue any receipt and, as such, suit for specific performance of agreement of sale was not maintainable. The sale made by defendant No.1 in favour of Harnek Singh, defendant No.2, is perfectly valid and legal.

5. Defendant No.2 filed separate written statement, inter-alia, taking the plea that defendant No.1 never entered into any agreement of sale with the plaintiff. In fact, she had sold 1/2 share in his favour for a valuable consideration of Rs.10,000/- on 28.12.1983 and defendant No.2 is a bonafide purchaser for valuable consideration. Defendant No.2 had no notice regarding agreement of sale between the plaintiff and defendant No.1 and the sale is protected under the law. He prayed for dismissal of the suit.

6. The Court of first Instance settled the following issues and the parties were put to trial:-

i). Whether defendant No.1 executed agreement dated 1.7.1982 with plaintiff? OPP.

ii). Whether defendant No.1 received Rs.17250/- in cash at the time of execution of agreement? OPP.

iii). Whether plaintiff had been and is ready and willing to perform his part of contract? OPP.

iv). Whether defendant No.2 is a bonafide purchaser for valuable consideration without notice? OPD-2.

v). Whether plaintiff is entitled to specific performance o