ANIL KUMAR SAHU Vs. BHOORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved by the impugned order dated 28-1-2005 (Annexure P-4) passed by learned Executing Court holding that the plaintiff is not entitled to get the decree of specific performance of contract executed, this writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. On bare perusal of the judgment and decree dated 21-9-2004 passed by learned Civil Judge, Class 1, Chhatarpur in Civil Suit No. 1-A/2004, it is gathered that a decree of specific performance of contract was passed in favour of the plaintiff against respondents by directing the plaintiff that balance amount of consideration Rs. 9,000/- be paid to the defendants/respondents till 30-10-2004 and in case the said amount is not accepted by them, it may be deposited in the Court.

(2.) The contention of learned Counsel for petitioner/decree holder is that within time on 20-10-2004, the said amount of Rs. 9,000/- was sent by Money Order to defendants/respondents, but the same was refused by them. Eventually, on 6-12-2004 execution application was filed and an application was also submitted to permit the plaintiff/petitioner to deposit balance amount of consideration Rs. 9,000/- in the Court. This application of petitioner was rejected and it was held by the Executing Court that the plaintiff is entitled for return of earnest money alongwith interest and the decree of specific performance of contract cannot be executed. Against this order, the decree holder has filed this petition.

(3.) I have heard Shri Satish Shrivastava, learned Counsel for petitioner and having heard him, I am of the view that this petition deserves to be allowed.