IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH *****

RSA-5745-2016 (O&M)

Reserved on:- 04.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 10.09.2025 Baljinder Singh …….Appellant Versus Bhupinder Singh and others .….Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr.A.K. Arora, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Abhay Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.1.

---

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

Defendant No.4 is in appeal against the judgments and decrees dated 28.02.2013 and 01.08.2016 passed by the Courts below; whereby the suit for recovery of Rs.13,50,000/- including Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation besides claim towards interest @ 12% per annum came to be partly decreed in favour of respondent No.1/ plaintiff while holding him entitled for recovery of Rs.7,50,000/- from the appellant/ defendant No.4 along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of execution of the sale deed till the date of institution of suit and further pendente lite and future interest @ 6% per annum till actual realization of amount.

2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1/ plaintiff filed a suit for recovery against the defendants-appellant alleging that on 13.12.2002/21.12.2002, defendant No.1 through his attorneys defendants No.2 & 3 agreed to sell 221.81 sq yards area out of Khasra Number 713 min, situated within the revenue estate of Tung Bala Urban, Abadi Basant Avenue, Amritsar on which Kothi bearing municipal No.472 was already existing, in favour of plaintiff/ respondent No.1 and defendant No.4 in equal shares against total sale consideration of Rs.33,00,000/-. It was pleaded that at the time of execution of agreement to sell, plaintiff and defendant No.4 advanced Rs.5,00,000/- in equal proportion and the sale deed was to be executed on or before 25.03.2003. Further, plaintiff handed over three cheques bearing Nos.759253, 759254 and 759255 and one cheque bearing No.759251 dated 17.03.2003 amounting to Rs.2 lakhs each of State Bank of India to defendant No.2 and defendant No.3, i.e. general attorneys of defendant No.1 vendor, which were encashed by them through their respective banks. Plaintiff been ready and willing to get the sale deed executed, handed over the balance sale consideration of his part to defendant No.4, who in order to deceive the plaintiff, joined hands with defendants No.1 to 3 and executed the sale deed of the whole area in his name while mentioning the sale consideration price as Rs.15,74,000/-. Hence the suit filed for refund of the amount paid along with interest and compensation as well.

3. Upon notice, despite service, defendants No.1 & 2 as well as defendant No.3 failed to put in appearance and as such they were proceeded against ex parte on 04.05.2006 and 09.09.2005, respectively. However, defendant No.4 appeared and filed written statement alleging therein that the present suit was not maintainable; suit was bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties and the plaintiff was estopped by his own act and conduct as he was having no cause of action to file the same. It was admitted in the written statement that though the agreement to sell was executed by defendant No.1 through his attorneys jointly in favour of plaintiff as well as defendant No.4 in equal proportion; but later plaintiff showed his inability to get the same executed as he wanted to invest the money somewhere else and therefore, requested the attorneys of defendant No.1 to refund the amount. It is only thereafter, on account of mutual agreement, a sum of Rs.7.50 lakhs was paid by father of defendant No.4/appellant to the plaintiff on 28.07.2023 and the remaining amount of Rs.4 lakhs was paid by defendant No.4/appellant through a post-dated cheque bearing No.847884 dated 29.12.2003 drawn on Punjab and Sind Bank, Amritsar and as such, no amount was due and the suit filed by plaintiff-respondent No.1 was liable to be dismissed with costs.

4. To this, plaintiff filed replication wherein the stand taken by defendant No.4 in his written statement was controv