In specific performance suits, plaintiffs must demonstrate continuous readiness and willingness to execute agreements, with testimony reflecting personal knowledge, particularly from intimate parties such as spouses.

JUDGMENT :

Deepak Gupta, J.

1. Suit for specific performance of the property in dispute filed by plaintiffs Balbir Singh and others (respondents herein) was decreed by the trial Court of learned Sub Judge 1st Class, Faridabad vide his judgment & decree dated 17.04.1995. Appeal filed by the defendants Kishan Chand and others (now appellants through respective LRs) was dismissed by the first Appellate Court of learned District Judge, Faridabad vide judgment dated 19.08.1998. Against these concurrent findings, the defendants have approached this Court by way of the present Regular Second Appeal.

2. Trial Court record was called. Same has been perused. In order to avoid confusion, parties shall be referred as per their status before the trial Court.

3.1 Admittedly, defendant No.l Kishan Chand was owner of agricultural land measuring 417 Kanai 1 Marla being 8341/18032 share in total land measuring 901 Kanai 12 Marla situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Dulhepur, Tehsil Ballabgarh, District Faridabad as per Jamabandi for the year 197778. He agreed to sell the said land to the plaintiffs vide an agreement to sell dated 28.04.1984 (Ex.P18), with following material terms & conditions:

- At the rate of Rs. 8,500/- per acre, i.e., for total sale consideration of Rs. 4,43,115.62/-.

- An amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- was received by him as earnest money. [Receipt - Ex.P19]

- The possession of the land of the share, which was in possession of vendor at the time of agreement, was delivered to the plaintiffs - proposed vendees, who were authorized to utilize the land the way they liked.

- Sale deed was agreed to be executed and registered up to 01.06.1985 on payment of balance consideration of Rs. 3,43,115.62/-.

- Vendor i.e. defendant No.l shall obtain income tax clearance certificate from the Income Tax Department prior to the target date.

- After the decision of the partition, the vendees will get the possession of that land, which will be allotted to defendant No.l - vendor, for which the vendees will have no objection.

- In case by the target date of 01.06.1985, the partition proceedings are not completed due to any reason, the limitation for the execution & registration of the sale deed would automatically be considered as extended up to the final decision of the partition case.

- After getting the partition order incorporated in the revenue record, the defendant No.l would give one month notice to the vendees for the execution and registration of the sale deed.

3.2 Since the partition proceedings were not complete up to 01.06.1985, so supplementary agreement dated 10.06.1985 (Ex.P20) was executed amongst the parties, extending the date of registration for another two months of the information of decision of the appeal. An amount of Rs. 50,000/- [Receipt - Ex.P21] more was paid to defendant No.l Kishan Chand at the time of this agreement, making total earnest money as Rs. 1,50,000/-. It was specifically inter alia stipulated in this agreement:

- That balance amount of Rs. 2,93,115.62/- shall be received by vendor at the time of registration of sale deed.

- That possession of the suit land had already been given to the buyers and that they were utilizing the same.

- That vendor was not satisfied with the partition order passed by the Assistant Collector First Grade, Ballabgarh and that the vendor i.e. defendant No.l shall file appeal against the partition order before the Appellate Court and after decision of the appellate court, defendant No.l give notice to the plaintiffs - vendees and after receipt thereof, the plaintiffs -vendees would get the sale deed executed and registered within next two months.

- That Vendor - defendant No.l shall obtain income tax clearance certificate from the concerned Department before execution and registration of the sale deed.

- That rest of the terms and conditions shall be as per the prior agreement dated 28.04.1984.

3.3 As per plaintiffs, over