ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

1. Challenging the correctness of the concurrent findings of the facts arrived at by the courts below, defendant no.1 and 2 have filed this Regular Second Appeal. The plaintiff’s suit for the grant of decree of possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell has been partly decreed while ordering refund of the earnest money alongwith interest. The property in dispute already stands sold in favour of defendant no.3 to 5. In order to prove written agreement to sell, the marginal witness as well as scribe were examined by the plaintiff.

2. On the other hand, defendants while defending the suit, claim that agreement to sell is forged and fabricated document. It is claimed that defendants are farmers and this agreement to sell has been forged in connivance with their commission agents.

3. The learned trial court found that defendant no.2 – Gurinder Singh was not major on the date when the agreement to sell was executed. Thus, the court refused to grant a decree for specific performance of the agreement to sell and granted alternative relief of refund of the earnest money alongwith interest. The aforesaid judgment of the trial court has been upheld by