IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 01.09.2025 Tehal Singh ...... Appellant versus Baldev Singh (since deceased) through his LRs and ors …... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present: Mr. Aakash Singla, Advocate and Ms. Vaishali Singla, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Abhimanyu Tewari, Advocate and Mr. Sidhant Awashti, Advocate for the respondents.

*****

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (Oral)

1. Defendant is in second appeal. For convenience, parties hereinafter are referred to by their original position before the Court of the First Instance, i.e. appellant as defendant and respondent as plaintiff. 2. Plaintiff filed suit for possession by way of specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 10.11.2004. As per plaintiff, defendant agreed to sell land measuring 184 Kanal 2 Marlas in his favour @ of Rs. 6,55,000/- per acre and executed agreement to sell dated 10.11.2004 in writing after receiving Rs. 15 lakhs as earnest money through cheque dated 10.11.2004. The parties agreed to get the sale deed executed on or before 14.05.2005 on payment of balance sale consideration by the plaintiff. It was also agreed that the defendants would get the land redeemed before 14.05.2005. As per plaintiff, on

10.11.2004, another agreement to sell qua Dera and the land beneath the Dera was also executed between the parties. Plaintiff claims that he always remained ready and willing to perform his part of contract, however, defendants kept on delaying the same on one pretext or the other. Plaintiff claims that on 08.05.2005, he came to know that the defendant was negotiating qua sale of land with third parties. He immediately approached defendant on 14.05.2005 for execution of the sale deed. 14.05.2005 and 15.05.2005 were declared as public holidays. Plaintiff claims to have remained present in the office of Sub-Registrar, Karnal on 13.05.2005 along with balance sale consideration and incidental charges. On the day after holidays, i.e. 16.05.2005, plaintiff claimed that he again remained present in the office of Sub-Registrar, Karnal. However, defendant failed to turn up to execute sale deed in his favour. As per plaintiff, the defendants orally agreed to deliver actual physical possession of the land which is joint with the plaintiff. Legal notice dated 20.05.2005 was served upon the defendants without any positive result. Plaintiff instituted present suit on 15.06.2005 claiming decree of specific performance and in the alternative decree for recovery of Rs. 30 lakhs, i.e. double the earnest money paid to the defendants.

3. Suit was contested by the defendants claiming that plaintiff is a practicing Advocate at District Courts, Karnal and was appearing in Civil Appeal titled as ‘Jagir Singh v. Tehal Singh and another’ in the Court of Additional District Judge, Karnal representing defendant No.1. Plaintiff No.1 persuaded defendants to sell their agricultural land. They agreed to sell the same @ Rs.7,90,000/- per acre in the presence of broker namely Lajwant Singh s/o Takhat Singh. Playing fraud, plaintiff No.1 got the agreement to sell executed on 10.11.2004 for the land in question @ Rs.6,55,000/- per acre instead of agreed rate of Rs.7,90,000/- per acre. Plaintiffs were never ready to get the sale deed executed and rather wanted to sell the same at higher rate with an intent to earn profit. Prior to target date, i.e. 14.01.2005, defendants objected to the agreement to sell regarding the rate mentioned as Rs.6,55,000/- instead of Rs.7,90,000/-. It is admitted that on 14.05.2005 and 15.05.2005, it was Saturday and Sunday and Tehsil Complex at Karnal was closed. Defendants claimed that plaintiffs orally extended the target date from 14.05.2005 to 20.05.2005 and claimed that they remained present in the office of Sub-Registrar Karnal on the extended date, but the plaintiffs failed to turn up. Defendants claimed to have got their presence marked on the said date. Receipt of earnest money of Rs.15 lakhs stands