T.P.S.MANN,J - (1.) SUIT for specific performance of contract dated 30.12.1980 filed by plaintiff-appellant was decreed with costs by learned Sub Judge 1st Class, Fazilka vide judgment dated 12.10.1983. Appeal against the same was filed by respondent No. 1, which was partly accepted by learned District Judge, Ferozepur vide judgment dated 10.12.1984. The plaintiff-appellant was held entitled to a decree for recovery of a sum of Rs. 6,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the agreement till its realization. He was held entitled to the costs assessed by the trial Court. To that an extent, judgment passed by the learned trial Court was modified. However, there was no order as to costs in the appeal. Aggrieved of the same, the plaintiff filed the present appeal in this Court.
(2.) THE plaintiff-appellant sought possession of 8 Kanals of suit land by way of specific performance of contract dated 30.12.1980. He pleaded that the suit land was owned by Bagga Singh defendant, who agreed to sell the same to him on 30.12.1980 for an amount of Rs. 8,000/-. He received an amount of Rs. 6,000/- as earnest money. The sale-deed was to be executed on 28.12.1981. The plaintiff was ready to perform his part of the contract and remained present before the Sub Registrar on 28.12.1981 but defendant Bagga Singh failed to turn up and inspite of notice, he refused to execute the sale-deed. Bagga Singh-defendant opposed the suit by filing a written statement, wherein he pleaded that he did not execute any such agreement to sell dated 30.12.1980. The value of the lard was Rs. 15,000/- to Rs. 16,000/- per killa. In fact, he had entered a into an agreement to mortgage the suit land for Rs. 8,000/- after receiving an amount of Rs. 3,000/- as earnest money and the remaining amount of Rs. 5,000/- was to be paid at the time of execution of the mortgage deed on 8.1.1982. On that date, he remained present before the Sub Registrar, Fazilka but the plaintiff did not turn up. He was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract but the plaintiff was not ready. Moreover, the suit property was not under his exclusive ownership nor he cultivated the same. No specific portion of killa Nos. 6 and 7 of Mustil No. 11 had been mentioned regarding which the agreement to sell pertained. Learned trial Court framed the following issues : "1. Whether the defendant executed an agreement dated 30.12.1980 ? OPP 2. Whether the plaintiff has been willing and ready to get the sale deed executed ? OPP 3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to specific performance of agreement ? OPP 4. If issue No. 3 is not proved whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs. 6,000/- ? OPP 5. Whether the plaintiff is in possession of the suit property ? OPP 6. Whether the plaintiff has knowingly, gave the address of the defendant wrong. If so its effect ? OPD 7. Whether the defendant could not alienate the specific khasra number ? If so, its effect ? OPD 8. Relief."
(3.) IN support of his case, the plaintiff himself appeared as PW1, besides examining PW2 Kashmiri Lal, PW3 Mohon Singh, PW4 Assa Singh and PW5 Hans Raj, whereas defendant Bagga Singh appeared himself as DW1 and also relied on the testimonies of DW2 Kishan Singh, DW3 Ram Singh and DW4 Gurdeep Singh.;