Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.4422 OF 2002

Janak Dulari Devi & Anr.

… Appellants

Vs.

Kapildeo Rai & Anr.

… Respondents

JU D G M E N T

R.V.RAVEENDRAN, J.

Plaintiffs in a suit for specific performance, aggrieved by the

judgment and decree of the Patna High Court dated 3.1.2002 dismissing his

second appeal against the decision of the first appellate court

dated 16.12.1997 dismissing their suit (in reversal of the judgment and

decree of the trial court dated 27.8.1990 decreeing the suit) have filed this

appeal by special leave.

1

2.

The case of the appellants in brief is as under : The second respondent

was the owner of the suit property. The second respondent executed a sale

deed dated 22.2.1988 (registered on 7.3.1988) in respect of the suit property

in favour of the appellants, for a consideration of Rs.22000/-; that Rs.17,000

was paid by the appellants to the second respondent, at the time of execution

and registration of sale deed; that the balance of Rs.5000 was to be paid

subsequently, when the vendor requested for the said payment; that the

second respondent retained the registration receipt in regard to the sale deed,

agreeing to deliver it to the appellants against payment of the balance sale

consideration; that on execution of the sale deed, by the second respondent,

his right, title and interest in the suit property passed to the appellants and

possession of the land sold was also delivered to them; that subsequently the

second respondent avoided receiving the balance of Rs.5000 and failed to

deliver the registration receipt; that the appellants issued a legal notice

calling upon the second respondent to deliver the registration receipt so that

they could collect the original registered sale deed, but the second

respondent send a reply denying the receipt of Rs.17000 and stating that the

entire consideration was due; and that therefore, it became necessary for the

appellants to file the suit. The appellants sought a decree for a direction to

the second respondent to deliver the registration receipt relating to the sale

2

deed dated 22.2.1988 by receiving the balance sale consideration of Rs.5000

and that in case the second respondent had already obtained the original sale

deed from the office of the Sub-Registrar, then for a direction to deliver the

same to the appellant. The said suit was valued at Rs.5000.

3.

The second respondent filed his written statement. He alleged that he

had agreed to sell the property as he urgently required the money for

celebrating the marriage of his daughter; that he executed and registered the

sale deed on 22.2.1988; that the appellant did not pay any part of the

consideration and the allegation that he had paid Rs.17000 towards the sale

price at the time of execution of sale deed was false; that the appellants had

played a fraud upon him by stating in the deed that Rs.17000 was already

paid towards the sale price and making him to sign the sale deed without

reading the deed; that when he demanded the sale price, as the appellants

stated that the sale consideration would be paid later, he retained the

registration receipt and did not deliver possession; that it was the intention of

parties that title in the property should pass to the appellants and possession

should be delivered, only on payment of the consideration of Rs.22000 by

the appellants; that as the appellants failed to pay the sale consideration, he

cancelled the said sale deed dated 22.2.1988 on 18.3.1988 and sold the

3

property to the first respondent on 29.8.1988 for a consideration of Rs.19000

and also delivered possession of the property to the first respondent and ever

since then the first respondent is in possession of the suit property. He

contended that as the title and possession remained with him even after

execution and registration of the sale deed in favour of the