JUDGMENT :

Anil Kshetarpal, J.

1. The correctness of the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the courts below while decreeing the suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell, is challenged by the defendant in this Regular Second Appeal. The agreement to sell was executed on 07.01.2006 with respect to property bearing MC No.B.XXXIII 2175 measuring 2425 sq. yards area for a total sale consideration of Rs.1,31,00,000/-. The execution of the agreement to sell is not in dispute between the parties, although the defendant claims that this document was executed as a collateral security for the repayment of loan. The agreement to sell is scribed on as many as five non-judicial papers of Rs.50/-. Each page is signed by two Directors of the appellant (defendant-Company). It has also come on record that on 06.01.2006 i.e a day prior to the agreement to sell, a resolution was passed in the Board meeting of the Company authorizing Sh. Revti Raman Gupta and Sh. Vinay Gupta, Directors of the Company to sign the agreement to sell in favour of the plaintiff (Sh.Sarvesh Kumar Jindal).

2. As per the agreement to sell dated 07.01.2006, Rs.20,00,000/- was paid as an e