L.N. MITTAL, J. - (1.) THIS is second appeal by legal representatives of original plaintiff Satnam Singh, since deceased, having remained partly successful in both the courts below.
(2.) AT the outset, it is to be noticed that memo of parties is not properly framed. There were five legal representatives of the plaintiff but names of only three of them have been mentioned in the memo of parties as appellants. Two other names appear to have been omitted by clerical or typographical error. In first appeal, all the five names were mentioned. Accordingly as orally prayed for, all the five legal representatives as mentioned in judgment of the trial court shall be deemed to be appellants. Necessary correction in the memo of parties be made by the office. Defendant-respondent Jasmer Singh has died during the pendency of the instant second appeal as intimated by his counsel on the preceding date of hearing. However, necessary steps for impleading his legal representatives have not been taken although the case was adjourned for today for this purpose. Learned counsel for the respondent states that legal heirs of the respondents have not contacted him. However, in view of amendment made by this Court in order 22 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the appeal does not abate and judgment can be pronounced notwithstanding the death of the respondent and it shall have be same effect as if it has been pronounced before the death took place. In view thereof, learned counsel for the parties including learned counsel for the respondent have been heard.
(3.) SATNAM Singh plaintiff filed suit against Jasmer Singh defendant-respondent for possession of suit land by specific performance of agreement to sell. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant agreed to sell 7 Bighas 8 Biswas land of Khasra No.379(3-9) and 380 min (3-19) to the plaintiff @ Rs.2,75,000/- per acre and received Rs.1,50,000/- as earnest money and executed agreement dated 10.12.1998. Sale deed was to be executed up to 10.04.1999. However on 06.04.1999, the defendant by making endorsement on the back of agreement received further amount of Rs.25,000/- and extended the date of execution of sale deed up to 10.05.1999. Again on 10.05.1999, the defendant by executing supplementary agreement extended the date of execution of the sale deed upto 25.05.1999 while acknowledging the receipt of Rs.1,75,000/- as mentioned hereinbefore. The plaintiff always remained ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and even attended the office of Sub-Registrar on 25.05.1999 to get the sale deed executed in terms of the agreement. But the defendant did not turn up and committed breach of the agreement. It was also pleaded that defendant is co-sharer in 162 Bighas 1 Biswa land of which the aforesaid suit land measuring 7 Bighas and 8 Biswas is a part and if the suit is not decreed for specific 7 Bighas 8 Biswas land of Khasra Nos.379 and 380 min, then the suit may be decreed regarding share in the joint land to the extent of 7 Bighas 8 Biswas.;