The main legal point established is the requirement to prove readiness and willingness to perform a contract, and the implications of failing to do so in a civil suit.

JUDGMENT

1. Appellant-defendant No.1 has filed this second appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 08.01.2019 passed in Regular Civil Appeal No.60/2018 by the 4th Additional District Judge, Katni (M.P.), whereby the appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated 19.03.2018 passed in RCSA No. 18/2011 by 1st Additional Civil Judge Class 2 to the Court of 1st Civil Judge Class 2, Katni, has been rejected.

2. Respondents No.1 to 5 were plaintiffs before the trial Court and they had filed a civil suit for eviction of appellant-defendant No.1 namely Amritlal from suit land i.e. Khasra No.1228, raqba 0.60 hectare, out of total raqba of 1.26 hectares, situated in Village Khirhani, Tehsil Bahoriband, District Kanti, M.P.

3. As per respondents-plaintiffs case, suit land was their ancestral land belonging to their father, who had died on 09.09.2004. Respondents-plaintiffs are joint owners of Khasra No. 1228. Said land was given on lease for a period of three years to Amritlal. For getting the lease of three years, Amrit Lal was required to pay the loan amount which was taken by the father of respondents for construction of a well over the suit land. The said loan could not be paid by the father of respondents-plaintiffs. For period of three years, appellant-defendant No.1 did agriculture on the land in question and repaid back the loan amount of Rs.50,010/- and also earned profit of Rs.40,000/- from the land in question. After completion of the lease period, appellant-defendant No.1 did not hand over the possession of land in question to the respondents-plaintiffs. Land was taken on lease on 25.04.2006. After completion of three years, possession of land was not given to the respondents-plaintiffs. Plaintiffs filed a suit for getting possession of land from appellant-defendant-Amritlal.

4. Appellant Amritlal had filed his written statement and also counterclaim for specific performance of contract and permanent injunction in respect of suit land. It was submitted by him that he had entered into an oral agreement of sale with Hulasi, the father of plaintiffs, on condition that he will pay the loan amount and thereafter, Hulasi will execute registered sale deed in favour of Amritlal. It was also averred by appellant that Ikrarnama was written by Panchayat and he had filed Ikrarnama as Ex.D/6 before the trial Court. The said Ikrarnama has been signed by the plaintiff namely Laxman, Ram Ratan, Rajesh and Suresh. Appellant Amrit Lal has proved the signature of plaintiff on Ikrarnama exhibit D/6. Witnesses namely Amritlal (DW1) and Bharat Lal Choudhary (DW2) have also deposed before the trial Court regarding the Ikrarnama and supported the version of Amritlal. Amrit Lal has filed Rin-pustika Ex.D/4 from his possession. It was submitted by him that after entering into agreement Rin-pustika was handed over to him. He also exhibited document Ex.D/5 i.e. the certificate issued by Panchayat that agreement entered into by Hulasi has not been followed by him.

5. Learned trial Court as well as appellate Court after considering the evidence available on record held that Ikrarnama Ex.D/6 i.e. the agreement to sell the property to Amritlal has been proved in the Court. It was further held that appellant-defendant No.1 was unable to prove that he was ready and willing to comply his part of contract. The averment is made that he was ready to comply with his part of contract but no such evidence had been adduced. Learned trial Court considered the documents, which have been filed by the appellant i.e. Ex.D/10 i.e. that is Rojnamchasanha, Ex.D/7 and Ex.D/8 i.e. written objections raised by appellant before Deputy Registrar and receipt of objection. One more document that is Ex.D/5 i.e. certificate of Panchayat was also filed to show the readiness and willingness of the appellant to execute sale deed. Learned trial Court has disbelieved the documents on the ground that all the documents were prepared after filing of suit as an afterthought and sai