R.S.A No. 1191 of 2008 ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A No. 1191 of 2008 Date of decision : September 01, 2009 Ghasi Ram, ...... Appellant (s) v. Raju and others, ...... Respondent(s) *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. Akshay Kumar Goel, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. M.R.Verma, Advocate for respondent No.1. *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? *** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral) This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned lower appellate Court reversing that of the trial Court and thereby dismissing the suit of the plaintiff/appellant for possession of suit property. Brief facts of case are that a plot was allotted in favour of the appellant some where before 1980. By an agreement Mark A, the appellant transferred all his rights in favour of defendant/respondent No.2 for a consideration of Rs.3000/-. In the said agreement, it was clearly mentioned that the appellant would be liable to pay all the amounts which stood R.S.A No. 1191 of 2008 ::2:: payable till the date of the agreement; that respondent No.2 would be liable to pay all the amounts which became subsequently payable, and that the appellant would not be responsible for any subsequent liability. In the year 1996, a sale deed was executed by the Improvement Trust Bhiwani in favour of the appellant and thereafter the appellant filed the instant suit. The following questions have been proposed. “ i) Whether the learned first appellate Court has rightly given the benefit of the provisions of Section 53- A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 to the respondents when they have failed to fulfill its required conditions ? ii) Whether the learned first appellate Court has rightly taken into consideration the terms of the agreement to sell dated 30.09.1980, Ex.D1 ? iii) Whether the respondents have duly proved the facts which could entitle them the benefit of the provisions of Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 ?” In my opinion, the learned lower appellate Court has rightly given the benefit of the provisions of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 to the respondents by holding that in fact no amount was shown to have become payable after the agreement dated 30.9.1980. It was for the appellant to have proved as a plaintiff whether any amount had fallen due after the said agreement. The fact that he got the sale deed executed in his favour in view of the original allotment would not show that the amount of Rs.1177/- odd paid by the appellant in the year 1996 related to any R.S.A No. 1191 of 2008 ::3:: unpaid instalment. In any case, the learned lower appellate Court has rightly observed that once the appellant had taken whatever he perceived to be the full value of his interest in the property, there is no occasion for him to have the sale deed registered in his favour. In the circumstances, I hold the questions proposed against the appellant and dismiss this appeal with no order as to costs. ( AJAY TEWARI ) September 01, 2009. JUDGE `kk'