SUMAT PRAKASH JAIN Vs. LAXMI
LAWS(RAJ)-2009-3-21
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (AT: JAIPUR)
Decided on March 05,2009

SUMAT PRAKASH JAIN Appellant
VERSUS
LAXMI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Ashok Parihar, J. - (1.) This D.B. Civil Special Appeal has been preferred by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 12.11.1990 of learned Single Judge of this Court.
(2.) The defendant appellant purchased a plot No. D-2, Raman Marg, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur from the then Urban Improvement Trust, Jaipur and constructed a house over it after taking a loan of Rs. 25,000/- from the Government of Rajasthan. The house was then given on rent to the Reserve Bank of India. The defendant appellant entered into an agreement (Ex. 2) with the plaintiff- respondent on 17.10.1972 for the sale of the above plot along with all the constructions for Rs. 75,000/- and towards the transaction the plaintiff- respondent paid an advance of Rs. 10,000/- to the defendant appellant. The sale deed was to be executed within three months from 17.10.1972 and the balance of the sale price was to be paid at the time of registration of the sale- deed. It was also agreed that the vendor and the purchaser would not be entitled to refuse to sell or buy the property and if the vendor refused to sell then he would pay double the advance money to the purchaser and if the purchaser refused to buy then the vendor would be entitled to forfeit the advance money as damages. The sale deed could not be executed within the stipulated time and, therefore, the plaintiff respondent filed the present suit for specific performance of the contract.
(3.) On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed:- 1]. Whether the plaintiff was always prepared to perform his part of the contract? 2]. Whether the defendant could execute the sale deed even without obtaining the Patta from the U.I.T. and he had shown the available title deeds to the plaintiff? 3]. Whether the plaintiff is not entitled to seek the specific performance from the defendant as damages have been provided in case of breach of agreement? 4]. Whether the period of three months was essence of agreement? 5]. Whether the suit for specific performance is not maintainable in view of the allegations in paras 5 and 6 of the written statement. 6]. Relief.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.