IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI

rd

ON THE 23 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 SECOND APPEAL No. 10 of 2025 SHYAMLAL AND OTHERS Versus RACHNA AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Makbool Ahmad Mansoori - Advocate for the appellants.

Shri Jitendra Bharat Mehta - Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.

JUDGMENT This appeal by the defendants is against the concurrent findings of facts recorded by two Courts below whereby a decree of specific performance has been granted against the defendants/appellants in civil suit No. 145A/2018 vide judgment and decree dated 15.09.2023 as affirmed by the appellate Court in Regular Civil Appeal No.38/2023 vide judgment and decree dated 08.11.2024.

2. The relevant facts of the case are that the defendants/appellants agreed to sale their land situated in Survey No. 24/1 admeasuring 0.24 hectare, Survey No. 31 admeasuring 0.27 hectare and Survey No. 33 admeasuring 0.72 hectare of village Shyampura, Tehsil Piploda, District Ratlam in favour of plaintiffs/respondents for which an agreement to sale (Exhibit P/1) was executed on 03.02.2018 according to which the sale was to be effected by 03.04.2018 i.e. within a period two months. There was stipulation in Clause No. 6 of the agreement to sale (Exhibit P/1) to the effect that the defendants shall get the demarcation of the suit property done in the presence of plaintiffs before execution of the registered sale deed. As per the agreement (Exhibit P/1), an amount of Rs. 6,11,000/- was paid by the plaintiffs to the defendants and rest of the amount was to be paid on the date of execution of sale deed. The sale consideration according to the agreed rate was Rs. 3,35,000/- per bigha. As such, the total sale consideration for total land of 4 bighas and 19 biswa was Rs. 16,48,200/- out of which an amount of Rs. 6,11,000/- was received by the defendants/appellants on the date of execution of agreement to sale.

3. The time of two months as stipulated in the agreement was getting completed on 03.04.2018. As such, both the parties by mutual consent extended the time by 10 days i.e. up to 13.04.2018 for which an endorsement was made on the agreement (Exhibit P/1) itself which is not under dispute in the present case.

4. According to the plaintiffs/respondents even though the demarcation was not done but they remained present before the Sub-Registrar on 13.04.2018 for execution of sale deed however, the defendants/appellants did not turn up. The receipt of presence before the Sub-Registrar office has been placed on record as Exhibit P/20 which shows that the plaintiffs/respondents were present before the Registrar on 13.04.2018.

5. It was averred in the plaint that despite repeated requests, the defendants/appellants neither got the suit land demarcated nor executed the sale deed. Thus, a notice through counsel was sent which the defendants refused to accept. Thus, a complaint before the CSP, Jaora and Station House Officer, Jaora was also submitted. In such circumstances, the suit came to be filed before the trial Court for the relief of specific performance and permanent injunction. 6. The defendants/appellants also filed their written statement whereby while denying all the averments in the plaint, it was also averred that the plaintiffs/respondents did not pay the remaining sale consideration of Rs.

10,37,200/- which they were required to pay as per the agreement upto 03.04.2018. However, even after the lapse of extended period of 10 days, the plaintiffs did not pay the amount. It was also stated in the written statement that on 11.05.2018, the defendants sent a notice to the plaintiffs thereby asking them to get the sale deed executed within three days from the date of receipt of notice by paying the remaining sale consideration. Although, this notice was received by the plaintiffs/respondents on 15.05.2018, they did not pay the balance amount thus the sale deed was not executed. As such, the contract got terminated thus, they are no