IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

226 RSA-6142-2014(O&M)

Date of decision: 09.03.2026 Sukhjinder Singh ...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Santosh Kaur & Others ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate for the appellant.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

The plaintiff is in second appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the learned Courts below whereby suit filed by the appellant for possession by way of specific performance of Agreement to Sell dated 24.08.2006 has been partly decreed holding the plaintiff entitled to recovery of earnest amount.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant had filed Civil Suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement for sale dated 24.8.2006 executed by defendant No.5 and Manjit Singh deceased husband of defendant No.1 and father of defendants No.2 to 4 regarding land measuring 4 kanal 5 marla, out of land bearing Khewat/Kharauni 106/118 Khasra No.27//4/2/0-6, 7/5-8, 8/8-0, 9/8-0, 10/8- 0, being 1/7 share, which comes to

4K-5M situated in Village Mand Faridkot, Tehsil Bholath, District Kapurthala, as per Jamabandi for the year 2000-2001, along with all rights appurtenant thereto i.e. share in Bore, engine (Tube well), Khal, Aar, passage, for a total sale consideration of Rs.1,25,000 (less Rs.90,000/- paid as earnest money vide agreement for sale dated 24.8.2006 and Rs.5,000/- paid as additional earnest money on 22.2.2007.)

AND In the alternative, suit for recovery of Rs.1,25,000/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of execution of the agreement for sale dated 24.8.2006 till actual realization of the decretal amount as detailed below:

Earnest money paid on 24.8.2006 Rs.90,000/- Additional earnest money paid on 22.2.2007 Rs. 5,000/- Damages Rs.20,000/-

Total Rs. 1,25,000/-

AND Suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants forever from alienating or transferring or creating any charge over the suit land mentioned above to any other person, except the plaintiff, illegally and forcibly in any manner whatsoever.

3. It was pleaded case of the appellant that Manjit Singh deceased/predecessor-in-interest of defendants No.1 to 4 and Piar Kaur/defendant No.5 were owners of the suit land. They had entered into Agreement to Sell dated 24.08.2006 with the plaintiff to sell the suit land to the plaintiff for total sale consideration of Rs.1,25,000/-. The plaintiff had paid an amount of Rs.90,000/- by way of earnest money in cash at the time of execution of Agreement. Target date was set for 23.02.2007. On 22.02.2007, the date was extended to 24.04.2007; and plaintiff had paid an additional amount of Rs.5,000/- by way of earnest money. It was pleaded that on 24.04.2007, the plaintiff was present in the Tehsil Office, but Manjit Singh and Piar Kaur did not turn up. Upon hearing of the demise of Manjit Singh, the plaintiff had served legal notice dated 21.07.2007 upon his LRs/defendants No.1 to 4 calling upon them to execute Sale Deed on 08.08.2007. On 08.08.2007 again defendants did not turn up rather threatened to alienate the suit property. Hence, present suit was filed on 25.09.2007.

4. Upon appraisal of pleadings and oral & documentary evidence adduced by the parties, learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kapurthala partly decreed of the suit of the plaintiff as follows: -

“26. In the light of said discussion, observations and findings on the issues, the suit of the plaintiff succeeds partly and stands decreed with costs to the effect that the plaintiff is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.95,000/- alongwith 9% p.a. simple interest w.e.f. 25.8.2006, till its realization in full and final from defendant No.5 and defendants No.1 to 4 (to the extent to which they have inherited the estate of deceased Manjit Singh) jointly as well as severally. Un-exhibited documents be returned to the parties, under the rules. Decree-sheet be prepared and file be consigned to the Judicial Record Room.”

5. Against the same, the