PARAMJEET SINGH, J. - (1.) INSTANT regular second appeal has been filed by the appellant - defendant against the judgment and decree dated 19.05.2011 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bathinda as well as judgment and decree dated 11.04.2013 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Bathinda.
(2.) THE detailed facts are already recapitulated in the judgments of the Courts below and are not required to be reproduced. However, the brief facts relevant for disposal of this second appeal are that respondent - plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell and in the alternative for recovery of double the amount of the earnest money. The plaintiff also prayed for injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the suit land in any manner. The plaintiff alleged in his plaint that on 24.03.2008 defendant entered into an agreement for sale of his land measuring 1 kanal 4 marlas, detailed in the headnote of the plaint, in favour of the plaintiff. The price agreed upon was Rs.1,27,200/ -, out of which Rs.25,000/ - were given as earnest money. As per the agreement, the sale deed was to be executed in favour of the plaintiff by 01.05.2008 after receiving the balance sale consideration and the expenses of sale deed were to be borne by the plaintiff. However, the date for execution of sale deed was extended upto 05.06.2008. It was also one of the terms of the agreement that in case defendant failed to get the sale deed executed and registered in favour of the plaintiff, then the defendant would be liable to pay double the amount of earnest money. The plaintiff was also given the right to get the agreement enforced through Court.
(3.) ON notice, defendant appeared and filed written statement admitting the execution of agreement to sell dated 24.03.2008 and receipt of earnest money. It was also admitted that date of execution of sale deed was fixed as 01.05.2008. Rest of the averments made in the plaint were denied. It was alleged that endorsement on the back of the agreement dated 28.04.2008 is fabricated and writing has been maneuvered. It was alleged that on the date of execution of the agreement, plaintiff took the signatures of the defendant at 2 -3 blank places on the back side of the agreement. Thereafter, this date has been extended.;