Arvind Kumar, J. - (1.) BOTH the Courts below have directed the appellants as well as respondents No. 3 and 4, their real brothers, to perform their part of the contract for execution of sale -deed pursuant to agreement to sell dated 11.9.2004 in favour of respondents No. 1 and 2 (plaintiffs) after taking the balance sale consideration.
(2.) AS per the pleadings of the parties respondents No. 1 and 2 filed a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 11.9.2004 vide which the appellants and respondents No. 3 and 4 agreed to sell their land for a sale consideration of Rs. 27,45,000/ - and each of them also received earnest money of Rs. 65000/ - in the shape of bank draft while Rs. 3625/ - in cash, totalling to Rs. 2,74,500/ - to all of them. It is their case that the defendants did not execute the sale -deed, which was to be executed on or before 11.3.2005. On the other hand, the stand of the appellants was that they never agreed to sell their land at such a throw away price rather their thumb impressions were obtained fraudulently on the agreement having blank columns. The Courts below on analysis of evidence adduced on record by the parties, as noticed above, directed the defendants to execute the sale deed on payment of balance sale consideration, as per agreement to sell dated 11.9.2004. Dis -satisfied with the same, instant regular second appeal has been filed by the appellants.
(3.) THE stand taken by the appellants, which otherwise runs contrary to that of taken by the other signatories to the agreement, who are none else but their own brothers, has been dealt with by the learned trial Court in para No. 12 of its judgment and the same reads as under: - 12. After going through the entire evident led by both the parties and after considering the rival contentions, it is amply clear that although, the plaintiffs have claimed that the agreement to sell dated 11.09.2004 Ex. PW -1/7 was executed by all the four defendants in favour of the plaintiff No. 1 on receipt of earnest money of Rs. 68625/ - by each of the defendants while agreeing to sell the suit land Rs. 24 lakhs per acre, yet, the defendants Jeet Singh (DW2) and Ranbir Singh (DW3) have denied their signatures or thumb impressions on the agreement to sell. The defendants Harpal Singh and Ranbir Singh have not come forward to deny their own thumb impressions or the thumb impressions of other defendants on the agreement to sell. The defendants Ranbir Singh and Jeet Singh who have claimed that they were not present in their house at the time of execution of this document have admitted the receipt of the earnest money in cash as well as through cheques which was deposited by them in their own accounts. Except bald denial of their thumb impressions or signatures on the agreement to sell, they have not produced any cogent evidence to substantiate their allegations in this regard. Even their real brothers Harpal and Balbir defendants have not come forward to support them in this regard and they have already executed the sale deeds in favour of plaintiffs regarding the land of their shares. Therefore, the agreement to sell dated 11.09.2004 stands fully proved from the statement of PW -1 T.P. Chauhan, the authorized representative of the plaintiff No. 1 company who had signed the agreement on behalf of the plaintiffs and proved the execution of the same.;