1

AFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Judgement delivered on

: 21/10/2022

FA No. 26 of 2018

Lalan Singh S/o Parmeshwar Singh, at present aged About 36

Years, R/o Village Shivnandanpur, P.S. And P.O. Bishrampur,

District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh

---- Appellant

Versus

1. Balram Kerketta S/o Late Manglu Kerketta, Aged About 48

Years, ...............Defendant No.1(a)

2. Tiwari Kerketta S/o Manglu Kerketta, Aged About 46

Years ...............Defendant No.1(b)

3. Nehru Kerketta S/o Late Manglu Kerketta, Aged About 44

Years, ...............Defendant No.1(c)

4. Nanki Kerketta S/o Late Manglu Kerketta, Aged About 42

Years, ...............Defendant No.1(d)

5. Madan Kerketta S/o Late Manglu Kerketta, Aged About 40

Years, ...............Defendant No.1(e)

6. Mohna Kerketta S/o Late Manglu Kerketta, Aged About 37 Years,

.............Defendant No.1(f)

Res. no.1 to 6 are R/o Village Khairbar Mohalla, Karaundha, P.S. And P.O.

Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh

Manglu S/o Ladi (died)----Def. No.1

7. Sujit Singh S/o Somaru Singh, Aged About 28 Years R/o

Mominpura, Near Harsagar Pond, Ambikapur, P.S. And P.O.

Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh ..............Defendant No.2,

8. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector Surguja, Ambikapur,

District Surguja, Chhattisgarh .............Defendant No.3

---Respondents

For appellant – Ms. Priyanka Mehta, Advocate.

None for respondents No.1 to 6 despite service of notice.

For respondent No.7 – Shri Sunil Tripathi and Shri Apoorv Tripathi,

Advocates.

For State/respondent No.8 – Shri Neeraj Pradhan, PL.

2

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri &

Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal

CAV Judgment

Per Goutam Bhaduri, J.

Heard.

1.

This appeal is against the judgement and decree dated 7^th October,

2017 passed by the Court of District Judge, Ambikapur in Civil Suit No.

A/14/2011 wherein suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff seeking specific

performance of contract as also for cancellation of sale deed made in

favour of Sujit Singh (defendant No.2)respondent No.7 herein be declared

null and void and agreement for sale dated 23/08/2010 be executed for

enforcement of sale deed in his favour.

2.

The brief facts of this case as pleaded is that the plaintiff Lalan

Singh entered in to an agreement with late Manglu for purchase of land

bearing khasra No.273, 289, 290, 287 & 288 admeasuring 0.121, 0.299,

0.166, 0.214 & 0.146 respectively total five plots, total area 0.946 hectare

for a consideration of Rs.16 lakhs. The agreement Ex.P-1 was executed

on 23^rd August, 2010. The agreement was registered with Sub Registrar

office. The plaintiff contended that out of sale consideration of Rs.16

lakhs, Rs.5 lakhs was paid as earnest money. The plaintiff contented that

16 point form was required to be submitted as per the norms of the State

Government to get the sale deed registered, the same seller was required

to obtain. The seller further agreed that in case of death of anyone, the

legal heir would be bound to execute the sale deed and whenever the sale

is required, the sale would be made in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff

3

contended that 16 point form was not supplied to the plaintiff for

registration of the sale deed and when he enquired from the respective

Patwari, the same was said to have been already obtained by the seller.

The plaintiff contended that on different dates i.e. on 26/05/2011,

6/06/2011 and 28/06/2011 the plaintiff wanted to get the sale deed

registered and contacted the respondent but the respondent was not found

at his home, eventually the sale deed could not be registered. It was

stated that the defendant was avoidin