JUDGMENT

Nidhi Gupta, J.

Present Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant/defendant against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the Courts below; whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff/respondent herein for possession by way of specific performance of the Agreement of Sale dated 02.01.2006 executed by defendant in favour of the plaintiff of suit property measuring 1 Biswa i.e. 1.2/3 Marlas, has been decreed by both the Courts below; and it has been directed that defendant is given three months time to execute the sale deed in favour of plaintiff from the date of judgment, upon receipt of balance sale consideration failing which the plaintiff shall be at liberty to take the recourse of law; and defendant is restrained from alienating the suit property in favour of anyone else except the plaintiff.

2. Order sheets indicate that respondent was served and had put in appearance as far back as on 21.04.2014. However, on the last date of hearing i.e. 10.04.2023, parties were not represented. Office report shows that ld. Counsel for the respondent was duly notified, however none appears. As such, the matter being of such an old vintage, is being heard and decided in the absence of ld. counsel for the respondent.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/respondent had filed a suit averring that defendant is owner in possession of suit property measuring 1 Biswa i.e. 1.2/3 Marlas. Defendant had entered into Agreement dated 02.01.2006 to sell the suit property to plaintiff for total sale consideration of Rs.26,000/- of which Rs.20,000/- was paid as earnest money. Remaining Rs.6,000/- was to be received by the defendant at the time of execution and registration of Sale Deed. No date was fixed in the Agreement for execution of Sale Deed. The plaintiff had requested the defendant many times to get the Sale Deed executed after receiving balance sale consideration of Rs.6,000/-. Plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his contract and has ready cash of Rs.6,000/-. Plaintiff had even served legal notice upon the defendant on 27.02.2006 to execute the Sale Deed within 15 days. The said notice was admittedly received by the defendant on 11.03.2006 but Sale Deed was not executed. As such, plaintiff filed the present suit on 22.09.2006.

4. Upon notice, defendant had appeared and resisted the suit by filing written statement and denied the Agreement. It was averred that defendant had never executed any Agreement as alleged nor received Rs.20,000/-. The Agreement, if any, was false, forged and fabricated and is a result of fraud and misrepresentation. As no Agreement was executed, therefore, no question of fixing the date and being ready and willing did not arise. However, defendant admitted the factum regarding service of notice by the plaintiff and also stated that he had filed reply to the said notice. Denying all other assertions, defendant had prayed for dismissal of the suit.

5. Replication was not filed.

6. From the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the learned trial Court: -

1. Whether the defendant had executed an agreement to sell dated 2.1.2006 executed in favour of the plaintiff ? OPP

2. Whether the defendant had received Rs.20,000/- as earnest money? OPP.

3. Whether the plaintiff remained ready and willing to perform his part of the contract? OPP.

3A. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages in alternative, if so? To what extent ? OPP.

3B. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP.

4. Whether the suit is not maintainable ? OPD.

5. Whether the agreement to sell in question is a forged and fabricated document ? OPD.

6. Relief."

7. Upon appraisal of the pleadings and the evidence led by the parties, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Samrala vide judgment and decree dated 08.02.2011 had decreed the suit of the plaintiff in the manner as mentioned above. The Civil Appeal filed by the defendant was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Ludhiana vide jud