MOHAMMAD MOHAR ALI Vs. MOHAMMAD MAMUD ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs instituted a suit on 19-6-1984 in the Court of the Munsiff No. 1 at Nagaon for specific performance of contract.

(2.) The brief facts are as follows :"The plaintiffs sold a plot of land to the defendant by a registered deed of sale on 19-2-1968. On the same date there was another registereddeed of sale stating that if the plaintiffs returns back the consideration money, the land sold by the plaintiffs shall be reconveyed to the plaintiffs. It is stated in the plaint that the possession of the land was not delivered to the defendant and it continued with the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs used to pay paddy rent to the defendant. It is stated in para 2 of the plaint that the plaintiffs requested the defendant to reconvey the land for the last 3 to 4 years, but that was not done. But the defendant got the land mutated in his name of 8-3-1984. There also was a proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. and in that proceedings the possession of the land was declared in favour of the defendant. There was a revision before the Sessions Judge and that revision also was rejected. It is stated in para 3 of the plaint (by way of amendment) that the plaintiffs wanted to refund the money to the defendant but the defendant did not accept the money and as such he did not perform his part of the contract and as such the suit was filed for specific performance of contract.

(3.) Written statement was filed by the defendant wherein the defendant denied the execution of the reconveyance deed (agreement for sale Ext. I in the suit). It was also stated in the written statement that the plaintiffs are not entitled to specific performance of contract. There was a plea that the suit is barred by limitation. Both the courts below held that Ext. I, the agreement for sale was duly executed by the defendant. So, this is basically a findings of fact and in the second appeal I am not inclined to interfere with that findings of fact. The trial Court decreed the suit. There was an appeal and that appeal also was dismissed. Hence, this second appeal.