SUDHIR MITTAL
Harwinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Gurpreet Singh – Respondent
Judgment
Mr. Sudhir Mittal, J.
This Regular Second Appeal arises out of a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell. The date of the agreement to sell is 05.05.2006 and the same is Ex.P1 on the record. Defendant No.1 agreed to sell his land measuring 01 bigha, 16 biswa and 11 biswansi to the plaintiffs for a total consideration of Rs.2,10,000/-. The entire consideration was paid at the time of execution of agreement to sell and possession was also delivered. Defendant No.1 had undertaken to get the sale deed registered after mutation of inheritance from his mother, namely, Ravinder Kaur was sanctioned in his favour. Suit has been decreed and appeal has been dismissed. The second appeal has been preferred by defendant No.2 i.e. subsequent purchaser.
2. Other relevant facts are that defendant No.1 i.e. the owner, threatened to alienate suit property in August, 2006 which led to the filing of a suit for permanent injunction by the plaintiffs. In reply, defendant No.1 admitted the agreement to sell as is evident from the judgment of the trial Court. The suit was finally decided vide award dated 01.05.2010 passed by the Lok Adalat which is Ex.P4 on the record. The award is based
Kalpraj Dharamshi and another Vs. Kotak Investment Advisors Limited and another
M/s Virgo Industries (Eng.) P. Ltd. Vs. M/s Venturetech Solutions P. Ltd. 2012 4 RCR(Civ) 372
State of Punjab Vs. Bua Das Kaushal
Swamy Atmananda and others Vs. Sri Ramakrishna Tapovanam and others
Tarinikamal Pandit and others Vs. Perfulla Kumar Chatterjee (dead) by LRs. AIR 1979 SC 1165
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.