IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

131 RSA-250-2026 (O&M)

DATE OF DECISION: 17.02.2026 TARSEM MASIH ....APPELLANT VERSUS BALDEV SINGH AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR *****

Present : Mr. A.P.S. Rehan, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Gourav Goel, Advocate for respondent No.2. (Through VC).

*****

YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR , J. (ORAL)

1. This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 01.12.2025 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur, whereby the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 14.07.2023 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gurdaspur in a civil suit bearing No.13 of 2018, decreeing the suit for specific performance of the agreement filed by plaintiff/respondent has been dismissed.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the material on record.

3. As per version of plaintiff, defendant No.1 had agreed to sell one shop to him vide agreement to sell dated 08.01.2014 for a total sale consideration of ₹9,20,000/- and a sum of ₹5,00,000/- was paid as earnest money. The sale deed was to be executed on or before 16.12.2016 on payment of balance sale consideration and possession of the shop in question was delivered to the plaintiff. However, defendant No.1 had concealed the fact that he has already mortgaged the suit property with a bank while obtaining a loan. When plaintiff approached defendant No.1 to get the sale deed executed, defendant No.1 told him that he has taken a loan by mortgaging the shop with the bank and he sought extension of time vide writing dated 08.12.2016 and the time for execution of sale deed was extended upto 06.12.2017 and another payment of ₹55,000/- was paid and receipt was executed in this regard on the backside of the agreement to sell. However, defendant No.1 failed to execute the sale deed, whereas plaintiff was always ready and willing to execute the same and he failed to turn up in the office of Sub-Registrar on the date fixed on which date plaintiff got executed and attested an affidavit dated 06.12.2017 to show that he was ready and willing to get the sale deed executed and thereafter, the suit was instituted.

4. Upon notice, defendant appeared and filed his written statement, wherein the execution of the agreement and receiving of ₹5,00,000/- as earnest money has been admitted. However, a plea has been taken that plaintiff did not have the funds to pay the balance sale consideration and he has delayed the execution of the sale deed and now, the market value of the shop is around ₹20,00,000/-. A plea has also been taken by defendant that he had not sold the roof rights and only shop was sold. It has been alleged that parties had good relations and defendant No.1 extended the date of registration of sale deed but additional payment of ₹55,000/- was not made. Now, defendant has already got the shop redeemed but plaintiff has failed to arrange the balance sale consideration and to get the sale deed executed and dismissal of the suit was sought.

5. From the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed:-

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for possession by way of Specific Performance of agreement as prayed for?

OPP

2. Whether the suit is not maintainable in the present form? OPD

3. Whether the plaintiff has not come to the court with clean hands and has concealed true and material facts from the Court? OPD

4. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is time barred? OPD

5. Whether the present suit is bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of the necessary parties? OPD

6. Relief.

6. Thereafter, both the parties led their evidence.

7. Both the Courts below, on appreciation of the pleadings and evidence on file have come to the conclusion that agreement to sell dated 08.01.2014 Ex.P1 was executed by defendant No.1 in favour of plaintiff and he had received ₹5,00,000/- as earnest money. Thereafter, defendant No.1 had got the date of execution