CAV JUDGMENT

Per Goutam Bhaduri, J Heard.

1. The present appeal is against the judgment and decree dated 11/05/2012 passed in Civil Suit No.1A/08 by the District Judge, Durg, whereby the suit for specific performance was dismissed. The plaintiff is in appeal before this Court.

2. According to the plaint averments, the plaintiff entered into a sale agreement for purchase of land whose present khasra numbers are Khasra No.24, 25, 26, 30 & 158 on 16/11/2006 with one Punva S/o Sarvan. The plaint prayer also includes that the sale deeds executed by Punit Ram (D-3), Pardeshi Ram (D-4), Punni Bai (D-5), Mangteen Bai (D-6) & Dheliya Bai (D-7), in favour of Deepak Dubey (D-8) and Lukesh Kumar Sahu (D-9), in respect of land bearing Khasra No.30 admeasuring 0.66 hectares, be declared as null and void. During pendency of the suit, the original seller Punva, who entered into agreement died, therefore, his legal heirs were brought on record from Respondents No.1.1 (A) to 1.1 (H); 1.2 (A) to 1.2 (F); 1.3 & 1.4; 1.5 (A) to 1.5 (C); and 2.

3. The plaintiff averred that Punva (since deceased) had entered into an agreement for sale of his land bearing Khasra No.24, 25, 26, 30 & 158 of 9.951 acres @ Rs.27 Lakhs per acre and in lieu of the consideration the plaintiff has received a part of sale consideration of Rs.12,50,000/- and the entire sale consideration was of Rs.1,60,67,700/- . The plaintiff further averred that the land:-

•

bearing Khasra No.30, admeasuring 0.66 hectares was having old Khasra No. of 11/1 and 12/1;

• bearing Khasra No.24 was part of Khasra No.11/1 & 12/1 which was sub-numbered as 11/4 and 12/4 and total area was 0.55 acres. The said land was sold by different land owners on the different point of time and lastly one Mangalu, who became the owner sold it to Punva vide Ex. P/9 on 21st of April 1976;

• In respect of land bearing Khasra No.25 & 158 which was the part of Khasra No.11/1 & 12/1 which was sub-numbered to 11/5 & 12/5 and lastly the purchasers were Devvati Bai and Punva, who became the owner of the said land by last purchase on 10th of February, 1978;

• In respect of land bearing Khasra No.26 the purchase was made by Punva on 03rd April, 1958 and 05th February 1963 and 27 October 1967 from the different sellers; and • In respect of Khasra No.30 Punva purchased the said land on

09th of February, 1973 & 07th November, 1974 and became the owner.

4. The plaintiff asserted that Punva being the owner of the said land entered into the said agreement on 11/06/2006 vide Ex. P/1. In the written-statement, Punva, while he was alive, along with Ram Prasad, admitted about execution of the agreement but stated that the agreement was manipulated and tampering was done in Clauses 3, 5 & 7. After hearing the parties and evaluating the evidence available on record, the learned District Judge has dismissed the suit. Hence this appeal.

5. (i) Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant would submit that the agreement having been admitted and Punva being the owner of the land in question, the agreement was proved. She would further submit that there is no dispute of the fact that in lieu of the sale, part of consideration Rs.12,50,000/- was received. She would further submit that defendant No.2 Ram Prasad is the son, who received the sale consideration on behalf of his father and the agreement Ex. P/1 bears the signature of his father. It is further submitted that Punva being the sole and exclusive owner, the rest of the defendants ought not to have questioned the existence of agreement. It is further submitted that defendant Nos.3 to 7 knowing fully well that they are not the owner of the suit land bearing Khasra No.30 have sold the land to Defendant Nos.8 & 9 who knowing fully well that the ownership does not vest with the seller and prior agreement was existing as per the publication made in the paper, got the sale deed executed in their favour, though in respect of the said land the agreement existed. He would further submit that when no plausible