IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JAI KUMAR PILLAI SECOND APPEAL No. 2149 of 2025 LAKSHMAN SINGH THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS Versus MANOJ AND ANOTHER.

Appearance:

Shri A.K. Sethi – Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Harish Joshi – Advocate for the appellants/defendants.

Reserved on : 24/09/2025 Delivered on : 09/10/2025 ===========================================

Signature Not Verified Signed by: JAGADISHAN

J U D G M E N T

Heard on the question of admission This second appeal under Section 100 of CPC has been filed by the appellants/defendants being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 25/07/2025 passed by Ist District Judge, Dhar, District-Dhar (M.P.) in RCA No.30/2023 filed by respondent/plaintiff whereby the judgment and decree dated 29/04/2023 passed by IInd Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhar, District-

Dhar (M.P.) in RCSA No.1200067/2016, was set-aside.

Facts of the case, in short are as under :-

2. That on 08/09/2016, the respondent No.1/plaintiff (Manoj S/o Ramdev Singh) had preferred a Civil Suit No.67-A/2016 seeking the relief of specific performance of Contract and permanent injunction before the learned Trial Court in respect to land admeasuring 0.368 hectare forming part of survey No.1013/1/2 and also land admeasuring 1.494 hectare forming part of survey No.1027/1 situated at Village-Tirla, Tehsil & District-Dhar (M.P.).

Signature Not Verified Signed by: JAGADISHAN

3. That it was stated in the plaint by the respondent No.1/plaintiff that original defendant (Lakshman Singh S/o Inder Singh) had entered into an agreement to sale dated 23/12/2014 with him with respect to land admeasuring 0.368 hectare forming part of survey No.1013/1/2 and also land admeasuring 1.494 hectare forming part of survey No.1027/1 situated at Village-Tirla, Tehsil & District-Dhar (M.P.) (Herein after referred as the suit property) for a total consideration of Rs.40,11,000/- It was further stated in the plaint that after receiving cash consideration of Rs.40,11,000/- on 23/12/2014 original defendant (Lakshman Singh. S/o. Inder Singh) had allegedly executed Sale Agreement (Ex.P/11) in favor of the respondent No.1/plaintiff. It is further alleged in the plaint that the cash consideration was paid on different dates and the alleged agreement was executed in presence of witness Pradeep Bafna (PW/3) and Ravi Ninama.

4. That the original defendant (Lakshman Singh S/o. Inder Singh) appeared before trial court on receiving the Notice of the case and contested the claim of the respondent No.1/plaintiff and by submitted written statement he had Signature Not Verified Signed by: JAGADISHAN denied each and every allegation leveled in the plaint i.e. the execution of Sale Agreement (Ex. P/11), specific averments of receiving sale consideration was also denied. The fact as pleaded in the plaint with regard to receiving of cash consideration of Rs.40,11,000/- was also specifically denied. The original defendant No.1 had alleged that the Sale Agreement (Ex. P/11) was completely forged and fabricated document.

5. The Trial Court after framing Nine issues came to the conclusion that issues No.1, 4 and 7 were proved. The Trial Court analyzed the evidence and dismissed the suit vide its judgment and decree dated 29/04/2023. Against which the respondent No.1/plaintiff had preferred a First Appeal before Ist Additional, District Judge, Dhar District-Dhar, (M.P.), which was registered as RCA No.30/2023. The appellants/defendants had also preferred the Cross Objections with respect to Issue No.1 and 7.

6. The learned First Appellate Court allowing the First Appeal preferred by the respondent No.1/plaintiff observed that specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 23/12/2014 to be executed in respect of sale of land survey Signature Not Verified Signed by: JAGADISHAN No.1013/1/2 admeasuring 0.368 hectare and survey No.1027/1 admeasuring 1.494 hectare situated in village Tirla, Tehsil & District-Dhar in the favour of respondent