- (1.) THIS second appeal is directed against the judgment ana decree of Additional district Judge, Ferozepur, reversing on appeal the judgment and decree of subordinate Judge IInd Class, Zira.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are that parbara Singh who owned 24 kanals and 7 marlas of land in village Nasir Wala, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur, entered into an agreement to sell the same to Sohan Singh plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 2400/ -. This, agreement was entered into on 31st January 1961 and a sum of Rs. 850/- was paid by him as earnest money to Darbara Singh. It was provided in the agreement that the sale deed was to be executed by 28th June, 1961 and in case of default the vendor was to pay a sum of Rs. 500/- as liquidated damages. In this agreement the field numbers of the land were not specified. Another agreement was entered into between Darbara Singh and Sohan Singh on 22nd March, 1961. Darbara Singh received another amount of Rs. 300/- and the field numbers of the land that had been agreed to be sold were specified. Both these agreements were executed at Dharamkote another village six miles away from the village in which the land is situate. These agreements were witnessed by Mangal Dass and Buta singh, and Tarseem Singh and Maluk Chand respectively. None of those four witnesses belongs to the village in which the land in dispute is situate. On 29th may, 1961, Darbara Singh, however, sold the land in dispute, which he had agreed to sell to Sohan Singh, to Gurmukh Singh and others for a sum of Rs. 2500/- by a registered sale deed. The present suit was filed on 19-6-61 by Sohan Singh for specific performance of the contract of sale entered into by Darbara Singh with him. The purchasers Gurmukh Singh and others were made parties to the suit. An alternative prayer was made that in case specific performance is not allowed a decree for Rs. 1650/- be passed in favour of the plaintiff against the defendants. This Rs. 1650/- is claimed on account of the amount received under the two agreements by Darbara Singh from Sohan Singh and Rs. 500/- liquidated damages agreed to in the first agreement of a 1st January 1961. So far as gurmukh Singh and other vendees are concerned their defence is that they are bona fide purchasers lor value without notice of the previous agreement to sen end as such are protected and the sale in their favour cannot be set aside and plaintiff's suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell cannot be decreed. Darbara Singh defendant No. 1 pleaded in defence that the plaintiff was not willing to purchase the land and he, therefore, entered into a contract of the sale with the defendants 2 to 9. The trial Court decreed the plaintiff's suit for a sum of Rs. 1650/- against defendant No. 1 with proportionate costs but dismissed the suit against defendants 2 to 9 we transferees. It held that defendants 2 to 9 had no notice of the agreement to sell and were bona fide transferees for value. It was further held that defendant No. 1 was never willing to perform his part of the contract and that he without any reason made a default in the agreement of the sale which he had entered into with the plaintiff.
(3.) AGAINST this decision detendant 1 and the Plaintiff appealed. The lower appellate court allowed the plaintiffs appeal and dismissed that of defendant No. 1. The finding of the trial Court that defendants 2 to 9 were bona fide transferees for value without notice was set aside and it was held that defendants 2 to 9 had notice of me prior agreement to sell executed by Darbara Singh in favour of Sohan singh plaintiff. In this view of the matter the plaintiffs suit for specific performance has been decreed. Defendants 2 to 9 who were dissatisfied with this decision have come up in second appeal to this Court.;