IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA RSA No. 242 of 2015 Reserved on: 11.08.2025 Decided on: 19.08.2025.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jalal Deen ......Ap.pellant.

Versus Isrial and others .....Respondents. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge Whether approved for reportin g?1 No For the appellant: Mrr. Sudhir Thakur, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Karun Negi, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Nimish Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.1.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Satyen Vaidya, Judge The instant Regular Second Appeal under Section h100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, “Code”) has gbeen filed against judgment and decree dated 27.02.2015, ipassed by learned District Judge, Chamba, H.P. in Civil Appeal No. 10/2013 (48/2013) whereby the judgment and decree dated 06.05.2013 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Chamba in Civil Suit No. 90/2007 has been partially set-aside and modified.

1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order?

2. The appellant herein was one of the defendants (D-2) before original Court in Civil Suit No. 90/2007. The suit was filed by plaintiff Isrial (Respondent No.1P herein) for specific performance of agreement dated 10.04..2006 whereby defendant No.1 Hassan Deen (D-1) in the original suit had agreed to sell the land measuring 1 bigha 06 Biswas comprised in Khata/Khatauni No. 110/137, Khasra No. 841/770 and 775, situate d at Mohal Chambi Pargana Gudial, Tehsil and Disrtrict Chamba (hereinafter referred to as the “suit land”) to Plaintiff, Isrial.

3. The parties hereinafter shall be referred to by the same status as they held before the learned trial Court.

4. Plaintiff Isrial had filed a suit with the allegation that Hassan Deen (D-1) had agreed to sell the suit land to the plaintiff for sale consideration of Rs.50,000/- vide an agreement to sell dated 10.04.2006. The plaintiff had paid a sum of Rs.25,000/- to Hassan Deen (D-1) as advance towards the sale consideration at the time of execution of the agreement.

5. The case of plaintiff Isrial was that Hassan Deen (D-1) had been declared owner in possession of total 3 bighas

12 Biswas of land by virtue of a decree passed by learned Senior Sub Judge, Chamba on 02.07.2002 in Civil Suit No.

198/97. By the aforesaid decree, Jalal Deen (D-2P) was held to be having no right, title or interest in the su.it land and it was declared that mutation of “Sehat Malkiyat” dated 27.09.1993 attested in favour of Jalal Deen (D-2) qua half share in the entire land measuring 3 bighas 12 Biswas was null and void. The decree passed by learned Senior Sub Judge, Chamba stood arffirmed in first appeal No.52/2002 by learned District Judge, Chamba on 21.09.2002 and had further been affirmed by this Court vide judgment dated

02.09.2003 in RSA No. 43/2003.

6. The plaintiff Isrial had further averred that after passing of judgment dated 02.09.2003 in RSA No. 43/2003, Hassan Deen (D-1) had transferred half share measuring 1 Hbigha 06 Biswas from the land, subject matter of Civil Suit No.198/97 in favour of Jalal Deen (D-2). A mutation of such transfer was attested on 25.02.2004 as mutation No. 446.

7. As per plaintiff Isrial, thereafter Hassan Deen (D-1) executed agreement to sell dated 10.04.2006 in his favour with respect to the remaining half share i.e. the suit land left with Hassan Deen (D-1) after transfer of half share in favour of Jalal Deen (D-2) vide mutation No. 446 dated 25.02.2004.

8. The plaintiff Isrial had further alleged that though the decree passed in Civil Suit No. 198/97 .had attained finality, but the revenue records had not been corrected in terms thereof. Thus, it was mentioned in agreement dated 10.04.2006 that Hassan Deen (D-1) would get the sale deed executed in favour of plaintiff Isrial within three months