JASWANT SINGH, J. - (1.) DEFENDANT nos.1,2 & Lrs of defendantno.3 are in second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 21.08.2009 passed by the learned Additional District Ambala, whereby the appeal preferred by the plaintiff/respondent no.1 against the judgment and decree dated 11.04.2008 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge(Sr. Divn.), Ambala has been allowed and consequently, respondent no.1 Tek Chand's suit for specific performance has been decreed in toto.
(2.) IN brief, facts of the case are that respondent no.1/plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 9.6.2000. It was alleged that appellants/defendant nos.1 to 3 had received a sum of Rs.2,20,500/ - as earnest money and the last date for execution of the sale deed was fixed as 10.10.2000. The possession of the suit land already stood delivered to the plaintiff at the time of agreement to sell. It was further alleged that additional sum of Rs.1,50,000/ - was received by the appellant on 10.10.2000 and the time to execute the sale deed was extended to 15.11.2000. Again on 27.12.2000 appellants received additional amount of Rs.1,25,000/ - out of which Rs.1,20,000/ - was deposited with respondent no.5 -Bank(to whom property was mortgaged by the appellants) and the last date for execution of the sale deed was again extended upto 31.03.2001. Despite the said extension, sale deed was not executed by the appellants and therefore, the present suit. Upon notice, defendant nos.1 and 4 to 6 were proceeded against ex -parte and the suit was resisted by only defendant nos.2 & 3. In their joint written statement, execution of the agreement was admitted. However, it was stated that as per the agreement to sell, the land owned and possessed by respondent nos.2 to 4 was also allegedly agreed to be sold. It was denied that defendant no.1 agreed to sell the land sustained and owned by defendant nos.2 to 4. It was also alleged that there was no payment of money and extension of date as alleged by plaintiff/respondent no.1 and the documents if any are forged documents.
(3.) REPLICATION was filed wherein the entire contents of the plaint were reiterated and those of the written statement were denied.;