JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) ONE Abdul Majid was the owner of certain properties described in the plaint. On 25-6-1942,
he entered into an agreement to sell these properties to defendant 2, Lala Sampat Ram alias
champa Ram and his adopted son, Lala Ram Gopal, defendant 3. On 17-7-1942 Abdul Majid
entered into another agreement with the plaintiff Babu Lal to sell the same properties to him for
rs. 37,000/ -. Though in the first agreement the price stipulated is Rs. 36,000/-, there is really not
much difference between the sale prices fixed under the two agreements as in the agreement
dated 25-6-1942, the vendees agreed to incur the entire expenses of execution, completion and
registration of the sale-deed, while under the document dated 17-7-1942, the entire costs of
execution, completion and registration of the document and brokerage, etc. , had to be paid by the
vendor and by way of stamp duty alone, on the sale-deed, roughly about Rs. 542/8/-had to be
paid. On 25-9-1942, Abdul Majid executed a sale-deed in favour of Sampat Ram and Ram Gopal and
had it registered on the 26th of September. On 26-9-1942, the plaintiff filed the suit for specific
performance on the agreement in his favour, dated 17-7-1942.
(2.) THE suit was decreed by the trial Court. Two appeals were filed in this Court. First Appeal No. 203 of 1944 was filed by Sampat Ram and Ram Gopal, while First Appeal No. 393 of 1944 was
filed by Abdul Majid. The appeal filed by Abdul Majid was dismissed for want of prosecution.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants, Sampat Ram and Ram Gopal, has urged that the plaintiff
cannot claim specific performance of the contract as the agreement in his favour was of a later
date, namely, 17-7-1942, and that the appellants had no knowledge of that agreement.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.