DARSHAN SINGH, J. - (1.) This judgment shall dispose of both the Regular Second Appeals filed against the judgment and decree dated 01.08.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kurkshetra, vide which two appeals filed by appellant-Balwant Singh against the judgment and decree dated 19.03.2010 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kurukshetra, has been dismissed, whereby two consolidated suits i.e. civil suit no. 56 of 11.4.2003/ 11.06.2008 titled as 'Balwant Singh v. Pritam Singh' and civil suit no. 57 of 11.12.2003/ 11.06.2008 titled as 'Pritam Singh v. Balwant Singh' have been decided.
(2.) The facts in nutshell are that appellant-Balwant Singh filed the civil suit no. 56 of 2008 against respondent-Pritam Singh for seeking a decree for declaration to the effect that the agreement to sell dated 27.05.2002 allegedly executed by him in favour of respondent-Pritam Singh with respect to the land detailed and described in Para no.1 of the plaint is illegal, null and void and not binding on his rights. It is alleged that the said agreement was obtained by respondent-Pritam Singh by playing fraud and concealment of the facts. It is further the case of the appellant that on 27.05.2002 he had gone to the Court complex for getting an affidavit typed for the purpose of remission of the school fees of his son. Respondent-Pritam Singh met him there and told that he will do the needful and he procured his thumb impression on two affidavits. One of them was handed over to him and other was kept by respondent- Pritam Singh. Plaintiff had no knowledge about the contents of the said document. Thereafter, it was revealed that respondent has got thumb marked the agreement to sell. It was further averred that the market value of the suit land was less than L 10 lacs, but a factitious sale price of L 5 lacs has been mentioned. It is further pleaded that the respondent- Pritam Singh came to the spot and tried to interfere in his possession. He even got issued the legal notice, but of no avail. Hence he filed the suit.
(3.) Said suit was contested by respondent-Pritam Singh on the grounds inter alia that no fraud was committed by him with the appellant. In-fact, the agreement to sell dated 27.05.2002 is perfectly legal and was validly executed by him with his free will. He thumb marked the same after fully understanding the contents thereof and also received a sum of L 65,000/- as earnest money, which was also attested by the witnesses. It was also agreed that the sale deed shall be executed on or before 31.012.2002. But, the appellant did not perform his part of contract. Though, the plaintiff remained present in the office of Sub Registrar on the prescribed date.;