The main legal point established in the judgment is that a party's readiness and willingness to perform an agreement to sell are crucial factors in determining entitlement to specific performance.

H. S. MADAAN, J.

1. Briefly summed up, facts of the case are that plaintiff – Rajinder Singh s/o Harcharan Singh Brar, r/o House No. 2224, Sector 21-C, Chandigarh had filed a suit against defendant A.K. Mohan s/o Late Shri C.L. Mohan, r/o House No. 310, Rail Vihar, Sector 4, Mansa Devi Complex, Panchkula, seeking grant of a decree for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 1.6.2004, with regard to Flat No. H -111, First Floor, AWHO, Sector 4, Mansa Devi Complex, Panchkula (hereinafter to be referred as 'flat in suit'), by specific performance of that agreement and by way of grant of mandatory injunction directing the defendant to execute all the necessary papers regarding sale of that flat in the name of plaintiff after receiving the remaining sale consideration amount.

2. As the case of the plaintiff goes, the defendant had entered into an agreement to sell the flat in suit with the plaintiff on 1.6.2004 for a total consideration amount of Rs. 17 lacs, receiving Rs.1.70 Lacs in cash as earnest money. It was agreed that the seller will pay, if anything is found due regarding the flat in question in record of the Society/Municipal Corporation or in record of the Electricity Department before the last date of the final payment, which was fixed as on or before 30.8.2004. It was agreed that the seller would deliver peaceful, vacant possession of the flat alongwith all original documents and papers pertaining and fitting fixtures of the said flat to the purchaser at the time of full and final payment. Other terms and conditions are detailed in the agreement itself. That agreement to sell was signed by both the parties and attested by two witnesses. According to the plaintiff, he has been ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and is even now ready and willing to do so, however, the defendant had served a legal notice dated 19.8.2004 upon the plaintiff issued through Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Advocate. The plaintiff had sold his property and prepared two bank drafts bearing No. 494833 dated 24.8.2004 for Rs. 8,30,000/- and another bank draft No. 18984 dated 25.8.2004 for Rs. 7 lacs and he remained present before the Sub Registrar, Panchkula, as per the directions of defendant, having remaining amount of Rs.15,30,000/- on 26.8.2004, for execution of the sale deed. The plaintiff had offered both the bank drafts/ remaining amount of Rs.15,30,000/-, but the defendant with mala fide intention did not receive the same and refused to come forward to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and to get it registered. The plaintiff marked his presence alongwith the remaining amount before Sub Registrar.

3. On getting notice, the defendant had appeared and filed a written statement contesting the suit, inter alia raising preliminary objections that the plaintiff has not approached the Court with clean hands and is guilty of concealing material facts he is not entitled to equitable relief of specific performance of agreement to sell. The suit is barred for non-joinder of necessary parties, etc. On merits, the defendant admitted having entered into an agreement to sell dated 1.6.2004 with the plaintiff stating that it was so done on the understanding that within 15 days, the plaintiff and the said property dealer would find a suitable buyer and in case they failed to do so, the flat would be purchased by the present plaintiff in accordance with terms and conditions of the agreement to sell. The defendant denied that the plaintiff had approached the property dealer for purchase of the flat. The defendant admitted execution of agreement dated 1.6.2004 and receipt of the earnest money. As it is pleaded in the written statement, as per clause 5 of the agreement, all the expenses were to be borne by the plaintiff, but the plaintiff was not paying the expenses on account of execution of conveyance deed, which is necessary for execution of the sale deed in question. Several requests had been made by the defenda