Hemant Gupta, J. - (1.) The defendants are in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree of by the Courts below arising out of a suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 11.7.1995.
(2.) The plaintiff has sought such decree with the assertions that land measuring 33 kanals 2 marlas was agreed to be sold for a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/ - after receiving a sum of Rs. 2 lacs as earnest money. The balance was to be paid to the defendants at the time of the execution and registration of the sale deed, which was to be executed on or before 30.4.1996. It is the case of the plaintiff that she was ready and willing to perform her part of the contract but defendant No. 1 in collusion with other defendants executed and got registered sale deed dated 8.2.1996 in favour of defendant Nos. 2 to 4, the present appellants. The said sale is illegal, null & void and not binding on the rights of plaintiff because all the defendants were having the knowledge of the agreement executed by Smt. Shanti defendant No. 1 in favour of the plaintiff.
(3.) Defendant No. 1 and defendant Nos. 2 to 4 filed separate written statements. The execution of the agreement in favour of the plaintiff dated 11.7.1995 was denied by defendant Nos. 1. It was pointed out that in fact, defendant No. 1 has sold a plot through registered sale deed in which Surinder Singh son of the plaintiff and one Narpat, are the the attesting witnesses. The said Surinder Singh has obtained thumb impressions of defendant No. 1 by a fraud and misrepresentation and the same have been used for an agreement of sale. She denied receiving any amount as earnest money and asserted that the sale deed dated 8.2.1996 is a valid one. Defendant Nos. 2 to 4 asserted therein that are bona -fide purchasers for value and consideration.;