DINESH MEHTA,J. - (1.) The present appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by the appellants-plaintiffs laying challenge to the judgment and decree dated 13.12.2017 passed by the Additional District Judge No.2, Sriganganagar (hereinafter referred to as the "Appellate Court") in Civil Appeal No. 07/2016 (13/2016) (CIS No. 19/2016) whereby, the judgment and decree dated 11.09.2015 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sriganganagar (hereinafter referred to as the "Trial Court") in Civil Original Suit No.24/2015, rejecting the plaintiffs' suit, while allowing the application of the defendant filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has been affirmed.
(2.) The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the plaintiffs had filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 24.11.2006, executed for sale of agriculture land. The said agreement contained a time limit for execution of the sale-deed as 30.04.2007.
(3.) The plaintiffs have, however, filed the suit in question on 28.05.2015, inter alia, asserting that vendor did not execute the sale deed, as the requisite mutation entries in the name of the seller/vendor were not made by such time, nevertheless she had been assuring that the sale deed would be executed as soon as the requisite mutation is done.;