A person with a contract for sale or a decree for specific performance of a contract does not have an interest in the land, but only a personal right. Therefore, the rights and liabilities under the contract do not attach to the land.

MISRA, J.:- The present second Appeal and the revision application arising out of two different suits came up for hearing before a learned Single Judge of this Court. The two cases involved the interpretation of Section 30 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act as the main point. The single Judge finding a conflict of judicial opinion in the two Division Bench decisions, namely, Shri Ram v. Dhani Ram Gupta, 1974 All WR (HC) 213 -(AIR 1974 All 358) and Shanti Prasad v. Akhtar, 1972 RD 275 (All) referred the two cases to a larger Bench. This is how these cases have come up before us.

2. Though the pattern of facts in the two cases is similar yet the details differ. It will, therefore, be convenient to give the material facts of the two cases to bring out the point involved therein.

3. In the Second Appeal No. 1467 of 1966, Mahendra Nath and his uncle Jeewa Ram were the co-tenants of certain plots, measuring 6.04 acres. By a deed of agreement dated 16th June, 1960, Jeewa Ram agreed to sell his half share in the plots as also his house to Mahendra Nath for a consideration of Rs. 3,000/-. Mahendra Nath paid Rs. 2,200/- by way of advance and the balance was to be paid on the date of sale within three years after the consolidation of holdings was over in the village. As a result of consolidation, a joint chak No. 10 with an area of 6.01 acres was formed. All the original plots of the co-tenure holders, mentioned in the agreement, were included in their joint chak except plot No. 172. In lieu of plot No. 172 (.06 acres), a new plot No. 164 (area .03 acres) was included in the chak.

4. It appears that Jeewa Ram died in the meantime leaving behind him his heirs and legal representatives. Mahendra Nath sought to enforce the agreement dated 16th June, 1960, by means of a suit against the heirs and legal representatives of Jeewa Ram. The claim was resisted by defendants Nos. 1 to 5 on the grounds, inter alia, that Jeewa Ram never executed any deed of agreement nor did he receive any advance, that Jeewa Ram had also executed a will in their favour and thus they were the rightful owners of the properties, that defendant No. 6 was not the heir of Jeewa Ram and she had no concern with the disputed property. She had about lost her claim before the consolidation authorities.

5. The trial court decreed the suit on the finding that Jeewa Ram did enter into an agreement with the plaintiff to sell his house and his half share in the plots and had received Rs. 2,200/- by way of advance. On appeal by the defendants, the Civil and Sessions Judge reversed the decree of the trial court. He took the view that Section 5 (c) (ii) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 prohibits the transfer by way of sale or gift or exchange any part of the holding in the consolidation area without the permission of the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) and as an agreement to sell is included in the definition of sale, it stands on the same footing as a sale and so it is hit by section 5 (c) (ii) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act. He further held that as the plaintiff wanted the enforcement of the entire agreement, it could not be enforced event in respect of the house. On other issues, the findings of the trial court were, however, upheld. The plaintiff has now come up in second appeal to this Court.

6. Out of the several pleas raised by the defendants, only one survives now-

"Whether the agreement to sell dated 16th June, 1960, can be specially enforced in respect of chak No. 10 which includes some new plots not included in the deed of agreement."?

7. In Civil Revision No. 653 of 1972, one Khawani Singh was the sirdar of certain plots, measuring 8 Bighas 18 Biswas, situate in village Chanda Turk. He entered into an agreement to sell his plots to Ghasita for a consideration of Rs. 2,136/- on 21st June, 1958. Khawani Singh deposited ten times rental on 5th February, 1960, to become a bhumidhar and on 6th February, 1960 he transferred 3 Bighas 4 Bis