IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Civil Suit No.7 of 2007 Date of decision: 21.7.2008 ------------------------------------------------- M/s Samridhi Biotech Pvt. Ltd. Plaintiff. Versus Surinder Singh and others. Defendants. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K.Ahuja, J. Whether approved for reporting1? No For the plaintiff: Mr.Bimal Gupta, Advocate along with Mr. Iqbal Khan, Manager of the plaintiff- Company. For the defendant: Mr. Anuj Nag and Ms. Bhawna Datta, Advocates for defendants 1 to 9. Defendants No.1 and 2 in person. V.K.Ahuja,J This is a suit for specific performance of contract filed by the plaintiff. It was alleged that for establishing an Industrial Unit, the plaintiff entered into an agreement with defendant No.1 on his own behalf as well as attorney of defendants No.5 to 9 on 13.6.2006. The defendant agreed accordingly to sell the land detailed in the plaint for a total consideration of Rs.1,11,47,000/- . The agreement was scribed by Purshotam Singh Saini. The plaintiff allegedly paid Rs.20.00 lacs as earnest money to defendants and the balance sale consideration was to be paid on or before 12.10.2006 when the deed was to be executed and registered. It was further alleged that two other agreements were also executed as detailed in the plaint but since the defendants failed to execute the sale deeds as agreed by them, hence the suit for specific performance filed by the plaintiff. Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? No.0 Defendants were contesting the suit but on a subsequent date, the parties compromised and submitted an application for permission to compromise. The statements of the parties were recorded separately and in view of this statements, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed in the terms that the suit land may be sold with the consent of duly authorized representative of plaintiff and defendants to some third person and the defendant agreed to return the sum of Rs.20.00 lacs received from them by the plaintiff. Apart from that, the plaintiff was also held entitled to the profit from sale of land in question to the prospective buyer. Accordingly, the suit is decreed in the alternative for recovery of Rs.20 lacs paid by them as earnest money in case the defendants commit any breach of these conditions of compromise and accordingly the suit stands compromised and decree is passed on the basis of the terms and conditions laid down in the application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC. Copy of the application shall form part of the decree-sheet. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. The Court fee be refunded to the plaintiff as per the Rules. 21st July, 2008 (V.K.Ahuja),J. (sds)