IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-4989-2017 with COCP-2349-2019 (O&M)

Judgment reserved on 20.08.2025 Judgment pronounced on 16.09.2005 SANDEEP KUMAR ... APPELLANT VERSUS VIDYA PARKASH ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Present: Mr. Abhilaksh Grover, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Chetan Jain, Senior Advocate with Mr. Chetan Slathia, Advocate for the respondent.

****

PARMOD GOYAL, J.

1. The appellant-defendant is aggrieved by the impugned judgment and decree dated 24.08.2017 passed by the District Judge, Yamuna Nagar, whereby appeal filed by the plaintiff-respondent was allowed. As a result, the judgment and decree dated 03.03.2014 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri dismissing the suit of the plaintiff, was set-aside and suit of plaintiff-respondent was decreed.

2. The plaintiff had preferred a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 29.12.2001, along with the prayer for symbolic possession of the land. The case of the plaintiff-respondent was that Ghanshyam Dass, father of defendant, had executed an agreement to sell dated 29.12.2021 for sale of land measuring 4 Bighas, out of a total land measuring 9 Bighas 7 Biswas, situated in village Tejli as described in the plaint.

3. Additionally, the plaintiff had sought a decree for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering in the actual, physical and peaceful possession of the Plaintiff over the suit land, and from alienating, creating any charge upon, or transferring the same to any third person. It was further stated that the father of defendant had passed away on 25.12.2006, and on the basis of Will dated 22.02.2003, the defendant has inherited the suit property as its sole owner.

4. It was asserted that agreement to sell dated 29-12-2001 was executed by Ghanshyam Dass for total sale consideration of Rs. 20,00,000/-, out of which Rs.2,00,000/- was paid as earnest money. The target date for execution and registration of the sale-deed was mutually agreed to be 31.05.2002. Since the suit land stood acquired and Ghanshyam Dass had already received the compensation amount, it was further agreed that the Plaintiff would be responsible for getting the suit land exempted from acquisition and thereafter he shall be bound to pay amount of execution received by Ghanshyam Dass to State Government. It was also agreed that in the event Ghanshyam Dass failed to execute the sale-deed, the Plaintiff would have the right to get sale-deed executed and registered in his favour or in favour of his nominee through the Court of law.

5. At the time of execution of the agreement to sell, possession was handed over to Plaintiff, and amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- was paid as further earnest money. Subsequently, on 08.09.2002, Ghanshyam Dass received a sum of Rs.13,00,000/-, by endorsing a receipt on the reverse side of the agreement, in the presence of attesting witnesses. It was further asserted that on 09.09.2002, another amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- was paid to Ghanshyam Dass against valid receipt. Thus, by 09.09.2002, the entire consideration of Rs.20,00,000/- stood fully paid. It was also averred that after receipt of the full consideration, Ghanshyam Dass executed a Special Power of Attorney dated 17.09.2002 in favour of the plaintiff, thereby authorizing him to deal with the property in any manner whatsoever.

6. It was asserted that the Plaintiff had deposited the compensation amount of Rs. 4,60,000/- with the Haryana Government and consequently got the suit land released from acquisition. Thereafter, the plaintiff requested Ghanshyam Dass to execute the sale deed, but he kept deferring the matter on one pretext or the other. In December 2006, Ghanshyam Dass had died and thereafter, the defendant, who was equally evasive, also avoided execution of the sale deed on different pretexts. It was consistently asserted that the plaintiff has always been ready and willing to perform his part of the a