JUDGMENT :

Alka Sarin, J.

The present appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff-appellant against the judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below dismissing his suit for specific performance.

2. The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 28.04.2016. It was the case set up by the plaintiff-appellant that the defendant-respondent was the owner in possession of the land measuring 11 kanals 15 marlas being 235/1885 share out of total land measuring 94 kanals 5 marlas comprised in Khewat No.84, Khatoni No.116, total Kittas 13, situated in Village Bir Badlawa, Sub-Tehsil Nigdhu, Tehsil Nilokheri, District Karnal and that he agreed to sell 11 kanals 15 marlas to the plaintiff-appellant for a total sum of Rs.30,85,000/- and on 20.01.2016 an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- was received by the defendant-respondent as earnest money and the remaining amount was to be paid on 28.04.2016 at the time of execution and registration of the sale deed. It is further the case that the plaintiff-appellant was ready and willing to get the sale deed executed on payment of balance sale consideration of Rs.15,85,000/-. On 28.04.2016 the plaintiff-appellant approached the defendant-respondent and requested him to execute the sale deed and register the land in favour of the plaintiff-appellant on receipt of the balance sale consideration. However, the defendant-respondent requested the plaintiff-appellant that he was unable to get the sale deed executed on that day and requested that the balance amount of Rs.15,85,000/- be paid to him as he was in dire need of money and hence the plaintiff-appellant paid the remaining amount of Rs.15,85,000/- to the defendant-respondent on 28.04.2016 and in this way the entire sale consideration of Rs.30,85,000/- was paid by the plaintiff-appellant to the defendant-respondent. It was further the case that after receiving the full and final consideration, the defendant-respondent executed a full payment agreement to sell in favour of the plaintiff-appellant on 28.04.2016 which was reduced into writing between the parties in the presence of witnesses. It was further the case that after the payment of the full and final consideration, despite approaching the defendant-respondent a number of times, the sale deed was not executed and hence a legal notice dated 06.12.2016 was served upon the defendant-respondent to come present in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Nigdhu at 09.00 A.M. on 15.12.2016 along with all the documentation. On 15.12.2016 the plaintiff-appellant remained present in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Nigdhu but the defendant-respondent failed to appear. It was further averred that the plaintiff-appellant was always ready and willing to get the sale deed executed. Hence, the suit. In the written statement, various preliminary objections were raised and on merits it was the stand taken that the plaintiff-appellant was a nephew of the defendant-respondent and that there was a dispute going on between the defendant-respondent and his own sons and that the sons were bent upon snatching the agricultural land. Due to this reason, the defendant-respondent approached the plaintiff-appellant for shelter and requested the plaintiff-appellant to make the sons of the defendant-respondent understand. It was further the case that the plaintiff-appellant took the defendant-respondent to the Tehsil Office by saying that they would get an application filed before the higher authorities against the sons and some signatures of the defendant-respondent were obtained on a blank and typed paper. It was further the case that the defendant-respondent was stumped and surprised when