IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SA No.410 of 2004 BRAHAMDEO SINGH, @ Brahmdeo Narayan Singh, Son of Late Ram Narayan Singh, village Sadikpur (Muraul) P.s. Sakira, District Muzaffarpur ….. Defendant … Appellant …. Appellant Versus AJODHYA SINGH, Son of Late Sundar Singh, village Kothiya, P.S. Tajpur, District Samastipur, at present Bangra, District Samastipur …. Plaintiff … Respondent .. Respondent ----------- For the Appellant : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar (Munna), Advocate ------- 4 03.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the appellant. The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 20.9.2004 passed by the Additional District Judge-cum-Fast Track Court No. 5, Samastipur in Title Appeal No. 60 of 1993 affirming the judgment and decree dated 27.2.1993 passed by the Subordinate Judge III, Samastipur, in Title Suit No. 3 of 1986. Title Suit No. 3 of 1986 has been filed by the plaintiff for declaration that he has acquired right, title and possession over the suit land fully detailed in the schedule of the plaint on account of sale deed dated 26.11.1984 executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff on the basis of the part payment of the consideration amount and, 2 further that the defendant is only entitled to receive balance amount of consideration money of a sum of Rs. 11,000/- from the plaintiff. Further relief sought is that the defendant be directed to receive the balance consideration money and handover the original deed of sale aforesaid to the plaintiff and if he does not comply in that case the certified copy of the sale deed be ordered to be treated as original. Case of the plaintiff is that the defendant agreed to sell the suit land on payment of Rs. 24,975/- as a consideration amount and after negotiation the plaintiff advanced Rs. 13975/- as a part payment of same. Thereafter, the defendant obtained permission of the Consolidation Officer, Pusa, for sale of the aforesaid land in Case No. 532 of 84 and ultimately, the sale deed was executed on 26.11.84. In the sale deed the amount already paid to the extent of the sum of Rs. 13,975/- was shown as advance to him and it was further incorporated that remaining balance sum of Rs. 11,000/- would be payable at the time of handing over registration receipt to the plaintiff. It is also the case of the 3 plaintiff that upon part payment of consideration money and execution of sale deed, possession of the land was handed over to the plaintiff. Thereafter, the plaintiff several time approached the defendant to receive the balance amount and handover the registration receipt to him but on one pretext or the other the matter was deferred by him. Hence sensing foul play, the plaintiff had brought the concerned title suit. The defendant contested the suit by filing written statement and admitted that he is the owner of the suit land and there was a negotiation between him and the plaintiff for sale of the suit land for a sum of Rs. 24,975/- and also that he had executed a sale deed dated 26.11.84 with respect to the suit land in favour of the plaintiff. However, he disputed that any part of consideration money has been given as advance to him with the condition remaining amount of Rs. 11,000/- was to be paid at the time of handing over the registration receipt. The trial court after consideration of materials on record has come to the conclusion 4 that in view of the clear cut recital in the sale deed itself by the defendant that the advance consideration money was received by him and no cogent evidence having been brought on record to prove contrary thereof, it is to be held that sale deed was executed by the defendant on payment of part of the consideration money and plaintiff was also put on possession by them. There is no doubt that the absolute title would vest in the plaintiff only after payment of the entire consideration money but the plaintiff was always ready to pay the balance amount and the defendant himself had avoided it for the reasons best known to him. Thus, it has been held that the aforesaid lacuna will not come in the way of the plaintiff regarding acquisition of title over the suit land and, accordingly, the suit was decreed and the plaintiff was directed to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 11,000/- within three months and the defendant was directed to receive the amount and thereafter, original sale deed would be handed over to the plaintiff. 5 The defendant thereafter preferred Title Appeal No. 60 of 1993. The appellate court also affirmed the findings recorded by the trial court concerned and dismissed the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in fact, there was no sale of the property due to the reason that only part of the consideration money was paid. However, when confronted with the provisions of Section 24 of the Transfer of Property Act, learned counsel could not show therefrom that the sale ought not have been effected on the basis of the part payment of consideration money. Indeed, the title would be conferred upon the purchaser only after payment of the entire consideration amount but there has been concurrent findings of the courts below that the plaintiff was always ready to pay the consideration amount and it was the defendant who, for the reasons best known to him, has avoided the same. Therefore, the direction has been given that the balance amount be deposited by the plaintiff and the defendant has been directed to 6 receive the same and only thereafter the original sale deed is to be handed over to the plaintiff. Learned counsel could not show any infirmity or substantial error committed by the courts below. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Spd/- (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)