- (1.) This Court on 17-7-1998, made the following order: "Admit the Appeal in view of the substantial questions of law raised in Ground No.14". In C.M.P.No.11942/98, this Court made an order of status quo obtaining as on the said day with regard to possession until further orders.
(2.) The substantial questions of law specified in Ground No.14 are as hereunder : i) Whether the lower Appellate Court is right in deciding Issue No.1, which involved execution of the sale agreement Ex.A.1, against the plaintiff on the ground that the plaintiff failed to examine the attestors as witnesses, in spite of holding that Ex.A.1 is proved ? ii) Whether it is open to the defendants/vendors under the agreement of sale Ex.A.1, to raise the plea of want of title in them to the property covered by the agreement, to defeat the plaintiff/vendor's suit for specific performance ? iii) Whether a decree for specific performance of contract to sell can be refused to a vendee willing to take such title as the vendors have ? iv) Whether the lower Appellate Court is right in presuming possession of a third party in the suit in which the parties have pleaded possession of persons other than the third party? v) Whether the lower Appellate Court is right in presuming possession of D.W.6 and of the vendor of D.W.2 under Ex.X-6, in the presence of material showing possession of defendant No.1 in revenue accounts, in the circumstances of the case ? vi) Whether the persons whom the vendors under an agreement of sale claim to have title to the property covered by the agreement but are not parties to the agreement of sale, are necessary parties to the suit brought by the vendee for specific performance; and if so, whether the question of not impleading them as parties can be raised and considered in the first appeal in a case in which the vendors/defendants have not raised any plea in their written statement and no issue was framed in that regard ? vii) Whether the first Appellate Court is entitled to substitute its own views and conclusions in place of the ones taken and recorded by the trial Court on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, without discussing and considering all that material, without meeting the reasoning and appreciation of the trial Court and without showing how the trial Court is wrong while reversing the judgment and decree of the trial Court ? viii) Whether the lower Appellate Court is right in reversing the trial Court's decree in its entirety, including the portion of the decree for permanent injunction when the plaintiff is in possession of the suit property in pursuance of agreement of sale executed by the defendants and when the defendants disclaim any title or right to possess the suit property ? ix) Whether a decree for specific performance can be refused to vendee against the vendor shown to have possessory title or undivided interest to the property covered by the agreement? x) Whether the judgment of the lower Appellate Court rendered without formulating the Points for determination and the decree following it, can be sustained in the circumstances of the case ?
(3.) Heard the Counsel on record.;