Back
SANJAY VASHISTH
Amrik Singh – Appellant
Versus
Gurdip Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the agreement and claims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. evidence evaluation and intent. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. court's rationale for decision. (Para 11) |
| 4. final ruling on the appeal. (Para 13) |
Judgment
Mr. Sanjay Vashisth, J. :-Present regular second appeal has been filed by the appellant/plaintiff against the concurrent findings of dismissal of civil suit.
2. Appellant/plaintiff-Amrik Singh filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 20.07.2009 executed by the defendant/respondent in favour of plaintiff, in respect of land measuring 9 Bigha 18 Biswa out of land comprising of khewat/khatuani no. 248/376, 377, 378, 379, 380, and 381 bearing Khasra no. 245(2-0), 181(9-10), 180 (3-5), 247 (1-18), 246 min (2-15), 246 min (0-5), 248(6-17), situated in the area of village Oind HB No. 294, Tehsil Chamkaur Sahib, District Rupnagar as entered in the jamabandi for the year 2002-03.
The pleaded facts by the plaintiff are that defendant/respondent-Gurdip Singh entered into an agreement to sell dated 20.07.2009 with plaintiff/appellant-Amrik Singh for the purpose of selling land measuring 9 Bigha 18 Biswa at the rate of Rs.7
An agreement to sell executed primarily as security for a loan lacks intention to transfer property rights.
The court emphasized that mere allegations of fraud require substantial proof, and readiness to perform in a contract is crucial in specific performance cases.
Continuous readiness and willingness from contract execution to judgment essential for specific performance claims, substantiated evidence is necessary to challenge agreements.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
