RSA No.2047 of 2008 (O& M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM No.11544-C of 2009 and RSA No. 2047 of 2008(O&M) Date of Decision: October 30 , 2009 Rajinder Singh ...... Appellant Versus Dalbir Singh and others ...... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.Raghbir Chaudhary, Advocate for the appellant. **** Ajay Tewari, J. CM No.11544-C of 2009 CM allowed as prayed for. RSA No. 2047 of 2008 (O&M) This appeal has been filed against the concurrent judgments of the Courts below decreeing the suit of the respondent for specific performance to the extent of refund of double the amount of earnest money with regard to an agreement to sell dated 8.7.2002. The following questions have been proposed”- i) Whether the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract which arose in furtherance of agreement to sell dated 08.07.2002? ii)Whether the courts below were justified in partly decreeing the suit of the plaintiff vis-a-vis the payment of double the amount of earnest money in spite of the fact that the main RSA No.2047 of 2008 (O& M) 2 prayer of the plaintiff (issue No.5) as regard to specific performance has been specifically declined by the courts below for the reasons returned on the said issue? iii)Whether in view of the facts and circumstances f the present case, the judgments and decrees passed by the courts below against the defendant (appellant) are illegal, unjust and unsustainable in the eyes of law? Learned counsel has only argued question No. (i). However, the said question is a pure question of fact. Learned counsel has taken me through the findings of both the Courts below recorded thereon but has not been able to persuade me that the said findings are either based on no evidence or on such perverse misreading of the evidence so as to be liable for interference under Section 100 CPC The same is decided against the appellant. Questions No. (ii) and (iii) are peripheral questions. Consequently this appeal as well as application for stay are dismissed. No costs. Since the appeal has been decided, the pending Civil Misc. Applications, if any, stand disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE October 30, 2009 sunita