Case: SATNAM SINGH Vs. SATNAM SINGH

2. The suit was filed by the respondent-plaintiff seeking specific performance of the agreement dated 09.06.2000 against the appellant-defendant alleging inter-alia that an agreement was executed by the defendant on 09.06.2000 in respect of the suit land measuring 11 kanals 7 marlas as described in the plaint, for consideration of Rs. 2,50,000/- per acre and for total consideration of Rs. 3,54,687.50/-. The plaintiff had paid Rs. 55,000/- by way of earnest money and had agreed to pay the balance amount within one year of the agreement. It was further alleged that the plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part of agreement and had approached the defendant offering the balance amount of sale consideration, however, the defendant did not pay any heed to it. The plaintiff, thereafter, had served a legal notice and called upon the defendant to remain present in the office of Sub/Joint Registrar, Nawanshahr to perform his part of contract, however, the defendant did not turn up and hence, the suit was filed.3. The appellant-defendant had resisted the suit by filing the written statement contending inter-alia that he had never executed any agreement to sell in favour of the plaintiff. According to him, he had taken a loan of Rs. 27,000/- from the plaintiff and the document was prepared only by way of security towards the said loan amount, which was misused by the plaintiff. He also contended that there was no legal notice served to him by the plaintiff prior to filing of the suit.4. The said suit was decreed by the Trial Court and the same was confirmed by the Appellate Court as well as by the High Court, as stated hereinabove. It is pertinent to note that after the dismissal of the Appeal by the Appellate Court, the respondent-plaintiff had filed the Execution proceedings seeking execution of the decree passed by the Trial Court, and pursuant to the order passed by the Executing Court, the sale deed was got executed on 23rd September, 2008 through the Court Commissioner, in favour of the respondent-plaintiff on his depositing the balance amount of consideration of Rs. 2,99,700/- vide the challan no. 21, SBI, Nawanshahr. A copy of the said sale deed along with translated version in English has been produced on record by the respondent-plaintiff.

Reasoning:
6. Since, the three Courts below have recorded the concurrent findings of facts in favour of the respondent-plaintiff with regard to the respondent having proved his readiness and willingness to perform his part of contract, and since the Courts below have exercised their discretion in favour of the respondent, directing the appellant to execute the sale deed in favour of the respondent, on the respondent depositing the balance sale consideration, and since the respondent had deposited the amount as directed by the trial court, before the execution of sale deed through the Court Commissioner in the Execution proceedings, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgement passed by the High Court. Even otherwise, the Ld. Advocate for the appellant has miserably failed to point out any illegality or perversity in the impugned order passed by the High Court confirming the judgements and decrees passed by the Appellate Court and the Trial Court. The present Appeal therefore deserves to be dismissed.