Gurusharan Sharma, J. - (1.) Admittedly, Kunti Domin owned and possessed a house at Katras Bazar, District Dhanbad, one room (measuririg 12' x 13') whereof is subject-matter of the present appeal. She died leaving behind two sons, namely, Chaitu Dome and Khetu Dome. On 16-3-1964, the plaintiff was inducted as tenant in the said room on monthly rental of Rs. 12. On 26-8-1971, defendant No. 1 (Chaitu Dome) executed a registered usufructuary mortgage-deed for the said room for Rs. 700/- in favour of the plaintiff.
(2.) Plaintiff's case is that defendant No. 1 agreed to sell the said room to him for Rs. 2,100 and executed an agreement for the same on 15-10-73. Rs. 700 was already with him for which he had executed usufructuary mortgage deed and further on 15-10-1973 a sum of Rs. 1,000 was paid to him. Accordingly to the terms of the said agreement, on receiving the balance consideration amount of Rs. 400 from the plaiantiff, defendant No. 1 was to execute the sale deed within three months. On the failure of defendant No.l to execute the deed, in spite of repeated requests by the plaintiff, a notice dated 29-11-1973 was sent to him through a lawyer which was replied by him on 7.12.1973. Plaintiff also received lawyer's notice dated 8.12.1983 on behalf of defendant No. 2 informing him that he had already purchased the room in question from defendant No. 1 and his brother Khetu Dome by registered sale- deed dated 7-11-1973.
(3.) Plaintiff thereafter filed Title Suit No. 117 of 1973 for specific performance of agreement for sale dated 15-10-1973, which was dismissed on 16-11-1976. Thereafter, he filed Title Appeal No. 215 of 1976, which has been allowed by impugned judgment and decree dated 23-7-1985. Trial Court's decree was set aside and the suit was decreed. Plaintiff claimed himself to be in occupation of the suit room from 15-10-1973 onwards in part performance of the agreement for sale and was always ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement.;