Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Chauhan and Sri A. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the defendant-appellants IInd set and Sri M. K. Gupta Advocate for the plaintiff-respondents.

2. Learned counsel for the parties state that the questions involved are legal questions and, therefore, the record of the lower Court is not required to ascertain the facts of the case; consequently this appeal is heard and decided at the stage of admission itself.

3. The instant second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 28-1-2004 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, Aligarh allowing Civil Appeal No. 108 of 1997 arising out of Original Suit No. 546 of 1989. The trial Court dismissed the suit for specific performance but allowed refund of the earnest money along with 12% interest. The judgment and decree passed by the trial Court was challenged in appeal by the plaintiff. The suit was instituted for specific performance. Shiv Kumar defendant 1st set was the original owner of the disputed land. He entered into an agreement to sell with the plaintiff Laxmi Devi on 11-9-1987 and subsequently another agreement was also executed in favour of Munni Lal who executed a power of att