Jaspreet Kaur v. Baldev Singh
Case Details
RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -1- - OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH -.- RSA-3096-2025 (O&M) RSA Date of Decision : 27.10.2025 Date of Decision : Jaspreet Kaur ....Appellant VERSUS Baldev Singh ....Respondent HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Mr. Manish Kumar Singla, Advocate and Present: Mr. Manish Kumar Singla, Advocate and Mr. Manish Kumar Singla, Advocate and Ms. Bhoomika, Advocate for the appellant. Ms. Bhoomika, Advocate for the appellant. Ms. Bhoomika, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Nitin Mittoo, Advocate for the respondent. Mr. Nitin Mittoo, Advocate for the respondent. Mr. Nitin Mittoo, Advocate for the respondent. (through Video Conferencing) (through Video Conferencing) -.- MANDEEP PANNU, J. MANDEEP PANNU, 1. The present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant– The present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant The present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant The present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant below defendant assailing the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below defendant assailing the concurrent findings recorded by both the defendant assailing the concurrent findings recorded by both the whereby the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior whereby the learned decreed the Senior Division), Jaitu decreed the suit of the plaintiff vide judgment and decree dated suit of the plaintiff vi .01.2023, and the learned de judgment and decree dated 31.01.2023, and the learned Additional District Judge, vide judgment dated 12.05.2025, dismissed the District Judge, Faridkot vide judgment dated 12.05.2025, dismissed the vide judgment dated 12.05.2025, dismissed the appeal filed by the defendant and affirmed the decree of the trial court. appeal filed by the defendant and affirmed the decree of the trial court. appeal filed by the defendant and affirmed the decree of the trial court. Brief Facts 2. The case of the plaintiff, as pleaded in the plaint, is that the defendant The case of the plaintiff, as pleaded in the plaint, is that the defendant The case of the plaintiff, as pleaded in the plaint, is that the defendant The case of the plaintiff, as pleaded in the plaint, is that the defendant is the owner in possession of a house constructed on land measuring five marlas. is the owner in possession of a house constructed on land measuring five marlas. is the owner in possession of a house constructed on land measuring five marlas. is the owner in possession of a house constructed on land measuring five marlas. On 22.11.2017, the defendant entered into an agreement to sell the said house On 22.11.2017, the defendant entered into an agreement to sell the said house On 22.11.2017, the defendant entered into an agreement to sell the said house On 22.11.2017, the defendant entered into an agreement to sell the said house attached thereto to the plaintiff for a total sale consideration of along with all rights attached thereto to the plaintiff for a total sale consideration of attached thereto to the plaintiff for a total sale consideration of along with all rights ₹3,00,000. Out of the total amount, the defendant received ₹2,00,000 as earnest ₹3,00,000. Out of the total amount, the defendant received ₹2,00,000 as earnest ₹3,00,000. Out of the total amount, the defendant received ₹2,00,000 as earnest ₹3,00,000. Out of the total amount, the defendant received ₹2,00,000 as earnest TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -2- - dated 22.11.2017 drawn on the State Bank of money through cheque No. 488598 dated 22.11.2017 drawn on the State Bank of dated 22.11.2017 drawn on the State Bank of money through cheque No.
Facts
ed between the parties that the sale deed would be India, Branch Jaitu. It was agreed between the parties that the sale deed would be ed between the parties that the sale deed would be India, Branch Jaitu. It was agre executed and registered in favour of the plaintiff on or before 20.11.2018. Though executed and registered in favour of the plaintiff on or before 20.11.2018. Though executed and registered in favour of the plaintiff on or before 20.11.2018. Though executed and registered in favour of the plaintiff on or before 20.11.2018. Though possession of the house was stated in the agreement to have been delivered to the possession of the house was stated in the agreement to have been delivered to the possession of the house was stated in the agreement to have been delivered to the possession of the house was stated in the agreement to have been delivered to the in fact, actual possession was not handed over. plaintiff at the time of its execution, in fact, actual possession was not handed over. in fact, actual possession was not handed over. plaintiff at the time of its execution, The plaintiff thus claimed possession along with the relief of specific performance. The plaintiff thus claimed possession along with the relief of specific performance. The plaintiff thus claimed possession along with the relief of specific performance. The plaintiff thus claimed possession along with the relief of specific performance. The plaintiff further asserted that he remained ever ready and willing to perform The plaintiff further asserted that he remained ever ready and willing to perform The plaintiff further asserted that he remained ever ready and willing to perform The plaintiff further asserted that he remained ever ready and willing to perform the balance sale consideration and his part of the contract. He had arranged the balance sale consideration and the balance sale consideration and his part of the contract. He had arranged Registrar, Jaitu, on the stipulated date, i.e., attended the office of the Sub-Registrar, Jaitu, on the stipulated date, i.e., Registrar, Jaitu, on the stipulated date, i.e., attended the office of the Sub 20.11.2018, along with the requisite funds and expenses for registration, but the 20.11.2018, along with the requisite funds and expenses for registration, but the 20.11.2018, along with the requisite funds and expenses for registration, but the 20.11.2018, along with the requisite funds and expenses for registration, but the ce before the Sub- defendant failed to appear. The plaintiff marked his presence before the Sub defendant failed to appear. The plaintiff marked his presen defendant failed to appear. The plaintiff marked his presen Registrar, got his affidavit attested by the Executive Magistrate, and also served a Registrar, got his affidavit attested by the Executive Magistrate, and also served a Registrar, got his affidavit attested by the Executive Magistrate, and also served a Registrar, got his affidavit attested by the Executive Magistrate, and also served a legal notice upon the defendant calling upon her to execute the sale deed, but to no legal notice upon the defendant calling upon her to execute the sale deed, but to no legal notice upon the defendant calling upon her to execute the sale deed, but to no legal notice upon the defendant calling upon her to execute the sale deed, but to no ormance of the avail. Consequently, the suit for possession by way of specific performance of the avail. Consequently, the suit for possession by way of specific perf avail. Consequently, the suit for possession by way of specific perf agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 was instituted, and in the alternative, the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 was instituted, and in the alternative, the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 was instituted, and in the alternative, the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 was instituted, and in the alternative, the ₹3,00,000 along with future interest, besides plaintiff also prayed for recovery of ₹3,00,000 along with future interest, besides ₹3,00,000 along with future interest, besides plaintiff also prayed for recovery of seeking a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the seeking a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the seeking a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the seeking a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the property. 3. In the written statement, the defendant took the plea that she is an In the written statement, the defendant took the plea that she is an In the written statement, the defendant took the plea that she is an In the written statement, the defendant took the plea that she is an illiterate and rustic villager who knows only to sign her name in Punjabi. It was illiterate and rustic villager who knows only to sign her name in Punjabi. It was illiterate and rustic villager who knows only to sign her name in Punjabi. It was illiterate and rustic villager who knows only to sign her name in Punjabi. It was pleaded that the alleged agreement to sell was never intended to be a sale pleaded that the alleged agreement to sell was never intended to be a sale pleaded that the alleged agreement to sell was never intended to be a sale pleaded that the alleged agreement to sell was never intended to be a sale as executed only as security for a loan transaction. The defendant transaction but was executed only as security for a loan transaction. The defendant as executed only as security for a loan transaction. The defendant transaction but w ₹1,50,000 from the plaintiff for construction stated that she had borrowed a sum of ₹1,50,000 from the plaintiff for construction ₹1,50,000 from the plaintiff for construction stated that she had borrowed a sum of ₹4,500 per month as interest. According of her residential house and agreed to pay ₹4,500 per month as interest. According ₹4,500 per month as interest. According of her residential house and agreed to pay TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -3- - ed cheques were also handed over as security, and the to her, two blank signed cheques were also handed over as security, and the ed cheques were also handed over as security, and the to her, two blank sign document relied upon by the plaintiff was merely a paper transaction executed for document relied upon by the plaintiff was merely a paper transaction executed for document relied upon by the plaintiff was merely a paper transaction executed for document relied upon by the plaintiff was merely a paper transaction executed for securing the said loan. It was further contended that the loan amount had already securing the said loan. It was further contended that the loan amount had already securing the said loan. It was further contended that the loan amount had already securing the said loan. It was further contended that the loan amount had already g funds from other sources, but the plaintiff been repaid by the defendant by raising funds from other sources, but the plaintiff g funds from other sources, but the plaintiff been repaid by the defendant by raisin failed to return the security document and misused the same. It was also alleged failed to return the security document and misused the same. It was also alleged failed to return the security document and misused the same. It was also alleged failed to return the security document and misused the same. It was also alleged that the plaintiff along with his family had assaulted the defendant and her that the plaintiff along with his family had assaulted the defendant and her that the plaintiff along with his family had assaulted the defendant and her that the plaintiff along with his family had assaulted the defendant and her on on their complaint. The husband, and that the police had failed to take action on their complaint. The husband, and that the police had failed to take acti husband, and that the police had failed to take acti ₹3,00,000 was wholly defendant also pleaded that the alleged sale consideration of ₹3,00,000 was wholly defendant also pleaded that the alleged sale consideration of defendant also pleaded that the alleged sale consideration of ₹15,00,000, and there was no inadequate as the property was worth around ₹15,00,000, and there was no inadequate as the property was worth around inadequate as the property was worth around mall sum. question of selling the only residential house of the family for such a small sum. question of selling the only residential house of the family for such a s question of selling the only residential house of the family for such a s 4. Upon completion of pleadings, the following issues were framed: Upon completion of pleadings, the following issues were framed:- 1. Whether the defendant is the owner in possession of the suit Whether the defendant is the owner in possession of the suit Whether the defendant is the owner in possession of the suit property as prayed for? OPP property as prayed for? OPP 2. Whether the defendant entered into agreement to sell dated Whether the defendant entered into agreement to sell dated Whether the defendant entered into agreement to sell dated the plaintiff as prayed for? OPP 22.11.2017 in favour of the plaintiff as prayed for? OPP 22.11.2017 in favour of 3. Whether the plaintiff is ready and willing to perform his part of Whether the plaintiff is ready and willing to perform his part of Whether the plaintiff is ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement? OPP the agreement? OPP 4. If issue No.1 to 3 are decided in favour of plaintiff, whether the If issue No.1 to 3 are decided in favour of plaintiff, whether the If issue No.1 to 3 are decided in favour of plaintiff, whether the f specific plaintiff is entitled to claim the relief of possession by way of specific plaintiff is entitled to claim the relief of possession by way o plaintiff is entitled to claim the relief of possession by way o performance of agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 as prayed for? performance of agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 as prayed for? performance of agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 as prayed for? performance of agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 as prayed for? OPP OPP 5. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim the relief of permanent Whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim the relief of permanent Whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim the relief of permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP injunction as prayed for? OPP TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -4- - 6. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim the relief of recovery Whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim the relief of recovery Whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim the relief of recovery alternative along with interest as prayed for? OPP in the alternative along with interest as prayed for? OPP in the 7. Whether the suit is not maintainable? OPD Whether the suit is not maintainable? OPD 8. Whether the defendant is illiterate villager and the suit property Whether the defendant is illiterate villager and the suit property Whether the defendant is illiterate villager and the suit property is only house of the defendant, if so, its effect? OPD is only house of the defendant, if so, its effect? OPD is only house of the defendant, if so, its effect? OPD 9. Whether the agreement was execut ed for the purpose of a Whether the agreement was executed for the purpose of a security, if so, its effect? OPD security, if so, its effect? OPD Whether the market value of the suit property is about Rs.15 10. Whether the market value of the suit property is about Rs.15 Whether the market value of the suit property is about Rs.15 10. lacs, if so, its effect? OPD lacs, if so, its effect? OPD Whether the plaintiff has not come to the Court with clean 11. Whether the plaintiff has not come to the Court with clean Whether the plaintiff has not come to the Court with clean 11. hands? OPD hands? OPD verified properly and the plaintiff has 12. Whether the suit is not verified properly and the plaintiff has verified properly and the plaintiff has 12. not affixed the property court fee? OPD not affixed the property court fee? OPD not affixed the property court fee? OPD 13. Relief. 13. 5. Both sides led evidence in support of their respective versions. The Both sides led evidence in support of their respective versions. The Both sides led evidence in support of their respective versions. The Both sides led evidence in support of their respective versions. The and produced the original agreement to sell plaintiff examined himself as PW1 and produced the original agreement to sell and produced the original agreement to sell plaintiff examined himself , besides examining both marginal witnesses who dated 22.11.2017 as Ex. P1, besides examining both marginal witnesses who , besides examining both marginal witnesses who dated 22.11.2017 as Ex. P1 categorically supported the execution of the document. The defendant also stepped categorically supported the execution of the document. The defendant also stepped categorically supported the execution of the document. The defendant also stepped categorically supported the execution of the document. The defendant also stepped into the witness box along with her husband and produced certain documents into the witness box along with her husband and produced certain documents into the witness box along with her husband and produced certain documents into the witness box along with her husband and produced certain documents tement (Ex. D1) to support the plea that the amount was including an account statement (Ex. D1) to support the plea that the amount was tement (Ex. D1) to support the plea that the amount was including an account sta returned. Findings of the trial Court Findings of the trial Court 6. After considering the evidence, the learned trial court held that the After considering the evidence, the learned trial court held that the After considering the evidence, the learned trial court held that the After considering the evidence, the learned trial court held that the plaintiff successfully proved the execution of the agreement to sell (Ex. P1). Both plaintiff successfully proved the execution of the agreement to sell (Ex. P1). Both plaintiff successfully proved the execution of the agreement to sell (Ex. P1). Both plaintiff successfully proved the execution of the agreement to sell (Ex. P1). Both TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -5- - examination. sting witnesses supported the plaintiff’s case and withstood cross-examination. sting witnesses supported the plaintiff’s case and withstood cross attesting witnesses supported the plaintiff’s case and withstood cross The defendant and her husband admitted their signatures on the agreement and The defendant and her husband admitted their signatures on the agreement and The defendant and her husband admitted their signatures on the agreement and The defendant and her husband admitted their signatures on the agreement and ₹2,00,000 as earnest money through cheque. The plea that the document receipt of ₹2,00,000 as earnest money through cheque. The plea that the document ₹2,00,000 as earnest money through cheque. The plea that the document ₹2,00,000 as earnest money through cheque. The plea that the document y as security for a loan was found unsupported by any credible was executed merely as security for a loan was found unsupported by any credible y as security for a loan was found unsupported by any credible was executed merel evidence. The trial court observed that there was no independent witness or evidence. The trial court observed that there was no independent witness or evidence. The trial court observed that there was no independent witness or evidence. The trial court observed that there was no independent witness or documentary proof to substantiate that the amount was a loan or that it had been documentary proof to substantiate that the amount was a loan or that it had been documentary proof to substantiate that the amount was a loan or that it had been documentary proof to substantiate that the amount was a loan or that it had been lied upon by the defendant was held repaid. The account entry (Ex.D1) relied upon by the defendant was held lied upon by the defendant was held repaid. The account entry (Ex. irrelevant, as it did not establish any connection with the transaction in question or irrelevant, as it did not establish any connection with the transaction in question or irrelevant, as it did not establish any connection with the transaction in question or irrelevant, as it did not establish any connection with the transaction in question or with the plaintiff’s son, Sukhwinder Singh, to whom the alleged repayment was with the plaintiff’s son, Sukhwinder Singh, to whom the alleged repayment was with the plaintiff’s son, Sukhwinder Singh, to whom the alleged repayment was with the plaintiff’s son, Sukhwinder Singh, to whom the alleged repayment was claimed to have been made. claimed to have been made. 7. held that the plea of inadequate sale The trial court further held that the plea of inadequate sale held that the plea of inadequate sale The trial court further consideration could not invalidate the contract, as undervaluation of sale consideration could not invalidate the contract, as undervaluation of sale consideration could not invalidate the contract, as undervaluation of sale consideration could not invalidate the contract, as undervaluation of sale consideration to save stamp duty was a common practice and not a ground to consideration to save stamp duty was a common practice and not a ground to consideration to save stamp duty was a common practice and not a ground to consideration to save stamp duty was a common practice and not a ground to se was the disbelieve a validly executed agreement. The contention that the house was the disbelieve a validly executed agreement. The contention that the hou disbelieve a validly executed agreement. The contention that the hou only residential property of the defendant was also rejected in view of the law laid only residential property of the defendant was also rejected in view of the law laid only residential property of the defendant was also rejected in view of the law laid only residential property of the defendant was also rejected in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in Rakesh Devi v. Sh down by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in down by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in Rakesh Devi v. Shish , wherein it was held that once the execution of Ram and others, 2018 (3) CCC 196, wherein it was held that once the execution of , wherein it was held that once the execution of Ram and others, 2018 (3) CCC 196 reement to sell is established, the vendor cannot subsequently claim an agreement to sell is established, the vendor cannot subsequently claim reement to sell is established, the vendor cannot subsequently claim reement to sell is established, the vendor cannot subsequently claim exemption from performance on the ground that the property was the sole exemption from performance on the ground that the property was the sole exemption from performance on the ground that the property was the sole exemption from performance on the ground that the property was the sole Gurbachan Singh and another v. residential house. Reliance was also placed on Gurbachan Singh and another v. residential house. Reliance was also placed on residential house. Reliance was also placed on Gurmit Singh and t Singh and Another, 2003 (4) RCR (Civil) 223 , to hold that when there R (Civil) 223, to hold that when there exists a written agreement, it must be interpreted by its plain language, and oral exists a written agreement, it must be interpreted by its plain language, and oral exists a written agreement, it must be interpreted by its plain language, and oral exists a written agreement, it must be interpreted by its plain language, and oral evidence cannot be introduced to vary its terms by alleging that it was a paper evidence cannot be introduced to vary its terms by alleging that it was a paper evidence cannot be introduced to vary its terms by alleging that it was a paper evidence cannot be introduced to vary its terms by alleging that it was a paper transaction for securing a loan. transaction for securing a loan. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -6- - 8. f readiness and willingness, the trial court found that On the question of readiness and willingness, the trial court found that f readiness and willingness, the trial court found that On the question o Registrar on the date fixed for the plaintiff had proved his presence before the Sub-Registrar on the date fixed for the plaintiff had proved his presence before the Sub the plaintiff had proved his presence before the Sub execution of the sale deed through his affidavit (Ex. execution of the sale P2) and other documentary deed through his affidavit (Ex.P2) and other documentary e of notice upon the defendant (Ex.P6) along evidence (Exs. P3 to P5). The service of notice upon the defendant (Ex.P6) along e of notice upon the defendant (Ex.P6) along evidence (Exs. P3 to P5). The servic with postal receipts (Exs. P7 and P8) was duly proved. Thus, the plaintiff was held with postal receipts (Exs. P7 and P8) was duly proved. Thus, the plaintiff was held with postal receipts (Exs. P7 and P8) was duly proved. Thus, the plaintiff was held with postal receipts (Exs. P7 and P8) was duly proved. Thus, the plaintiff was held entitled to the relief of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated entitled to the relief of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated entitled to the relief of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated entitled to the relief of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated the alternative prayer for 22.11.2017. The suit was decreed accordingly, and the alternative prayer for 22.11.2017. The suit was decreed accordingly, and 22.11.2017. The suit was decreed accordingly, and ₹3,00,000 was declined as redundant. recovery of ₹3,00,000 was declined as redundant. ₹3,00,000 was declined as redundant. Findings of the first Appellate Court Findings of the first Appellate Court 9. .01.2023, the Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 31.01.2023, the Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 3 Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 3 defendant filed an appeal before the learned Additional defendant filed an appeal before the learned hich was Additional District Judge, which was dismissed on 12.05.2025. The first appellate court, on a reappraisal of evidence, dismissed on 12.05.2025. The first appellate court, on a reappraisal of evidence, dismissed on 12.05.2025. The first appellate court, on a reappraisal of evidence, dismissed on 12.05.2025. The first appellate court, on a reappraisal of evidence, concurred with the findings of the trial court holding that the agreement to sell (Ex. concurred with the findings of the trial court holding that the agreement to sell (Ex. concurred with the findings of the trial court holding that the agreement to sell (Ex. concurred with the findings of the trial court holding that the agreement to sell (Ex. P1) had been validly executed, that the plea of loan/security was an afterthought P1) had been validly executed, that the plea of loan/security was an afterthou P1) had been validly executed, that the plea of loan/security was an afterthou P1) had been validly executed, that the plea of loan/security was an afterthou unsupported by evidence, and that the plaintiff had established continuous unsupported by evidence, and that the plaintiff had established continuous unsupported by evidence, and that the plaintiff had established continuous unsupported by evidence, and that the plaintiff had established continuous readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract. The appeal was readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract. The appeal was readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract. The appeal was readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, affirming the decree for specific performance. accordingly dismissed, affirming the decree for specific performance. accordingly dismissed, affirming the decree for specific performance. 10. Hence, the present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the Hence, the present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the Hence, the present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the Hence, the present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the defendant challenging the concurrent findings of the Courts below. defendant challenging the concurrent findings of the appellant–defendant challenging the concurrent findings of the
Legal Reasoning
Having considered the entire record and submissions, this Court finds Having considered the entire record and submissions, this Court finds Having considered the entire record and submissions, this Court finds Having considered the entire record and submissions, this Court finds that the findings recorded by both the Courts that the findings recorded by both the below are based on proper Courts below are based on proper appreciation of evidence and correct application of law. No question of law, much appreciation of evidence and correct application of law. No question of law, much appreciation of evidence and correct application of law. No question of law, much appreciation of evidence and correct application of law. No question of law, much less any substantial question of law, arises for determination in the present appeal. less any substantial question of law, arises for determination in the present appeal. less any substantial question of law, arises for determination in the present appeal. less any substantial question of law, arises for determination in the present appeal. 30. Consequently, finding no merit in the present appeal, th Consequently, e same is finding no merit in the present appeal, the same is dismissed in limine, as no arguable points have dismissed in limine, as no been raised so as to warrant have been raised so as to warrant by this Court. The concurrent judgments and decrees passed by the interference by this Court. The concurrent judgments and decrees passed by the by this Court. The concurrent judgments and decrees passed by the by this Court. The concurrent judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below are well reasoned, based on evidence and do not call for interference Courts below are well reasoned, based on evidence and do not call for interference Courts below are well reasoned, based on evidence and do not call for interference Courts below are well reasoned, based on evidence and do not call for interference 31.
Arguments
Submissions of learned counsel for the appellant Submissions of learned counsel for the appellant Submissions of learned counsel for the appellant 11. Learned counsel for the appellant– Learned counsel for the appellant ued –defendant has vehemently argued that both the Courts below have erred in law and on facts while decreeing the suit Courts below have erred in law and on facts while decreeing the suit below have erred in law and on facts while decreeing the suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017. It is contended for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017. It is contended for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017. It is contended for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017. It is contended appreciation of that the impugned judgments suffer from misreading and non-appreciation of that the impugned judgments suffer from misreading and non that the impugned judgments suffer from misreading and non TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -7- - vidence on record, and that the findings recorded are perverse and material evidence on record, and that the findings recorded are perverse and vidence on record, and that the findings recorded are perverse and vidence on record, and that the findings recorded are perverse and unsustainable in law. unsustainable in law. 12. below have failed to appreciate the It is submitted that the Courts below have failed to appreciate the below have failed to appreciate the It is submitted that the most crucial aspect of the case that the appellant was working as a domestic most crucial aspect of the case that the appellant was working as a domestic most crucial aspect of the case that the appellant was working as a domestic most crucial aspect of the case that the appellant was working as a domestic plaintiff and that the plaintiff, being in a servant in the house of the respondent–plaintiff and that the plaintiff, being in a plaintiff and that the plaintiff, being in a servant in the ho dominant position, exploited the illiteracy and ignorance of the appellant to obtain dominant position, exploited the illiteracy and ignorance of the appellant to obtain dominant position, exploited the illiteracy and ignorance of the appellant to obtain dominant position, exploited the illiteracy and ignorance of the appellant to obtain her signatures on the impugned document. The relationship between the parties her signatures on the impugned document. The relationship between the parties her signatures on the impugned document. The relationship between the parties her signatures on the impugned document. The relationship between the parties mployee, and thus the alleged transaction was vitiated was that of employer and employee, and thus the alleged transaction was vitiated mployee, and thus the alleged transaction was vitiated was that of employer and e by undue influence and inequality of bargaining power. It is further argued that the by undue influence and inequality of bargaining power. It is further argued that the by undue influence and inequality of bargaining power. It is further argued that the by undue influence and inequality of bargaining power. It is further argued that the ₹3,00,000 for a residential house worth more than alleged sale consideration of ₹3,00,000 for a residential house worth more than ₹3,00,000 for a residential house worth more than alleged sale consideration of rly establishes that the document was not an ₹15,00,000 at the relevant time clearly establishes that the document was not an rly establishes that the document was not an ₹15,00,000 at the relevant time clea agreement to sell but was executed only as security for repayment of a loan agreement to sell but was executed only as security for repayment of a loan agreement to sell but was executed only as security for repayment of a loan agreement to sell but was executed only as security for repayment of a loan advanced for the construction of the appellant’s house. advanced for the construction of the appellant’s house. advanced for the construction of the appellant’s house. 13. Learned counsel further submits that both the Learned counsel below have submits that both the Courts below have e settled principle that the plaintiff has to prove his own case and cannot ignored the settled principle that the plaintiff has to prove his own case and cannot e settled principle that the plaintiff has to prove his own case and cannot e settled principle that the plaintiff has to prove his own case and cannot succeed on the weakness of the defence. It is urged that even if the defence version succeed on the weakness of the defence. It is urged that even if the defence version succeed on the weakness of the defence. It is urged that even if the defence version succeed on the weakness of the defence. It is urged that even if the defence version were to be ignored, the plaintiff has miserably failed to prove his own pleadings. It were to be ignored, the plaintiff has miserably failed to prove his own pleadings. It were to be ignored, the plaintiff has miserably failed to prove his own pleadings. It were to be ignored, the plaintiff has miserably failed to prove his own pleadings. It that mere exhibition of the document Ex. P1 does not prove its contents, is argued that mere exhibition of the document Ex. P1 does not prove its contents, that mere exhibition of the document Ex. P1 does not prove its contents, that mere exhibition of the document Ex. P1 does not prove its contents, and the plaintiff was required to establish the execution of the document by cogent and the plaintiff was required to establish the execution of the document by cogent and the plaintiff was required to establish the execution of the document by cogent and the plaintiff was required to establish the execution of the document by cogent and convincing evidence. The plaintiff has failed to produce any independent and convincing evidence. The plaintiff has failed to produce any independent and convincing evidence. The plaintiff has failed to produce any independent and convincing evidence. The plaintiff has failed to produce any independent e payment of earnest money, source of income, or financial evidence regarding the payment of earnest money, source of income, or financial e payment of earnest money, source of income, or financial evidence regarding th capacity to pay the balance sale consideration. capacity to pay the balance sale consideration. 14. It is further argued that the Courts It is further argued that the below have erred in presuming Courts below have erred in presuming t without readiness and willingness of the plaintiff to perform his part of the contract without readiness and willingness of the plaintiff to perform his part of the contrac readiness and willingness of the plaintiff to perform his part of the contrac TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -8- - any proof. Learned counsel contends that readiness does not merely mean a any proof. Learned counsel contends that readiness does not merely mean a any proof. Learned counsel contends that readiness does not merely mean a any proof. Learned counsel contends that readiness does not merely mean a declaration of intent but includes proof of financial capacity to pay the balance declaration of intent but includes proof of financial capacity to pay the balance declaration of intent but includes proof of financial capacity to pay the balance declaration of intent but includes proof of financial capacity to pay the balance consideration and actual conduct consistent with such intention. No evidence has consideration and actual conduct consistent with such intention. No evidence has consideration and actual conduct consistent with such intention. No evidence has consideration and actual conduct consistent with such intention. No evidence has uced to show that the plaintiff had sufficient funds or that he genuinely been produced to show that the plaintiff had sufficient funds or that he genuinely uced to show that the plaintiff had sufficient funds or that he genuinely uced to show that the plaintiff had sufficient funds or that he genuinely intended to complete the transaction. Reliance has been placed upon the principle intended to complete the transaction. Reliance has been placed upon the principle intended to complete the transaction. Reliance has been placed upon the principle intended to complete the transaction. Reliance has been placed upon the principle Registrar’s office or filing of an affidavit does not, that mere presence at the Sub-Registrar’s office or filing of an affidavit does not, Registrar’s office or filing of an affidavit does not, that mere presence at the Sub blish continuous readiness and willingness throughout. by itself, establish continuous readiness and willingness throughout. blish continuous readiness and willingness throughout. 15. It is also submitted that the lower appellate court has failed to It is also submitted that the lower appellate court has failed to It is also submitted that the lower appellate court has failed to It is also submitted that the lower appellate court has failed to discharge its duty as the final court of fact by not recording independent findings discharge its duty as the final court of fact by not recording independent findings discharge its duty as the final court of fact by not recording independent findings discharge its duty as the final court of fact by not recording independent findings on the issues involved and by merely endorsing the conclusions of the trial court in on the issues involved and by merely endorsing the conclusions of the trial court in on the issues involved and by merely endorsing the conclusions of the trial court in on the issues involved and by merely endorsing the conclusions of the trial court in cal manner. The appellate court was required to examine the a cryptic and mechanical manner. The appellate court was required to examine the cal manner. The appellate court was required to examine the a cryptic and mechani wise and give reasoned findings, but the impugned judgment is evidence issue-wise and give reasoned findings, but the impugned judgment is wise and give reasoned findings, but the impugned judgment is wise and give reasoned findings, but the impugned judgment is speaking, and contrary to devoid of such analysis. The findings are composite, non-speaking, and contrary to devoid of such analysis. The findings are composite, non devoid of such analysis. The findings are composite, non by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in G. by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in settled judicial norms as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in settled judicial norms as laid down , where it was held Saraswathi & Another v. B. Gopalakrishna Naidu & Others, where it was held Saraswathi & Another v. B. Gopalakrishna Naidu & Others Saraswathi & Another v. B. Gopalakrishna Naidu & Others that appellate Courts must deal specifically with each issue and record conclusions Courts must deal specifically with each issue and record conclusions must deal specifically with each issue and record conclusions based on evidence. based on evidence. 16. Learned counsel has further submitted Learned counsel below have has further submitted that the Courts below have wrongly assumed that possession of the property was delivered to the plaintiff wrongly assumed that possession of the property was delivered to the plaintiff wrongly assumed that possession of the property was delivered to the plaintiff wrongly assumed that possession of the property was delivered to the plaintiff under the agreement Ex. P1, whereas it is an admitted fact that the defendant has agreement Ex.P1, whereas it is an admitted fact that the defendant has P1, whereas it is an admitted fact that the defendant has ession was remained in continuous possession of the house. The finding that possession was remained in continuous possession of the house. The finding that poss remained in continuous possession of the house. The finding that poss given is based on mere recitals in the document without any supporting evidence. given is based on mere recitals in the document without any supporting evidence. given is based on mere recitals in the document without any supporting evidence. given is based on mere recitals in the document without any supporting evidence. 17. It is next contended that the Courts It is next contended that the below have failed to consider that Courts below have failed to consider that plaintiff is not in conformity with the prescribed Form the plaint of the respondent–plaintiff is not in conformity with the prescribed Form plaintiff is not in conformity with the prescribed Form the plaint of the respondent TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -9- - and therefore, . 47 or 48 of Appendix A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and therefore, . 47 or 48 of Appendix A of the Code of Civil Procedure, No. 47 or 48 of Appendix A of the Code of Civil Procedure, the decree passed suffers from procedural irregularity. It is urged that under the decree passed suffers from procedural irregularity. It is urged that under the decree passed suffers from procedural irregularity. It is urged that under the decree passed suffers from procedural irregularity. It is urged that under Section 20(2)(a) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, specific performance is a Section 20(2)(a) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, specific performance is a Section 20(2)(a) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, specific performance is a Section 20(2)(a) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, specific performance is a d ought not to have been granted in favour of the plaintiff in discretionary relief and ought not to have been granted in favour of the plaintiff in d ought not to have been granted in favour of the plaintiff in discretionary relief an the peculiar facts of this case, where the alleged transaction was unconscionable the peculiar facts of this case, where the alleged transaction was unconscionable the peculiar facts of this case, where the alleged transaction was unconscionable the peculiar facts of this case, where the alleged transaction was unconscionable below, while exercising discretion, were bound to and inequitable. The Courts below, while exercising discretion, were bound to below, while exercising discretion, were bound to and inequitable. The be caused to the appellant if specific performance consider the hardship that would be caused to the appellant if specific performance be caused to the appellant if specific performance consider the hardship that would were ordered, particularly since the property in question is her only residential were ordered, particularly since the property in question is her only residential were ordered, particularly since the property in question is her only residential were ordered, particularly since the property in question is her only residential house. 18. below have misread and It is further urged that the learned Courts below have misread and It is further urged that the learned It is further urged that the learned ate the same as a whole, and have misconstrued the evidence, failed to appreciate the same as a whole, and have ate the same as a whole, and have misconstrued the evidence, failed to appreci drawn conclusions based on assumptions and conjectures rather than on a proper drawn conclusions based on assumptions and conjectures rather than on a proper drawn conclusions based on assumptions and conjectures rather than on a proper drawn conclusions based on assumptions and conjectures rather than on a proper evaluation of the record. The judgments, according to learned counsel, are a result evaluation of the record. The judgments, according to learned counsel, are a result evaluation of the record. The judgments, according to learned counsel, are a result evaluation of the record. The judgments, according to learned counsel, are a result consideration of relevant evidence and misapplication of the law. consideration of relevant evidence and misapplicatio of non-consideration of relevant evidence and misapplicatio 19. In view of the above submissions, it is prayed that the concurrent In view of the above submissions, it is prayed that the concurrent In view of the above submissions, it is prayed that the concurrent In view of the above submissions, it is prayed that the concurrent below be set aside as being perverse and contrary to law, findings of the Courts below be set aside as being perverse and contrary to law, below be set aside as being perverse and contrary to law, findings of the respondent for specific performance of the and that the suit of the plaintiff–respondent for specific performance of the respondent for specific performance of the and that the suit of the plaintiff o sell be dismissed. agreement to sell be dismissed. Submissions of learned counsel for the respondent Submissions of learned counsel for the respondent Submissions of learned counsel for the respondent 20. submits that there is no illegality Learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no illegality Learned counsel for the respondent Learned counsel for the respondent and perversity in the judgments and decrees passed by the and perversity in the Courts below, therefore, judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below, therefore, he prays for dismissal of the present regular second appeal. he prays for dismissal of the present regular second appeal. he prays for dismissal of the present regular second appeal. 21. and perused the record I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record I have heard the learned counsel for the I have heard the learned counsel for the as well as the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below. as well as the concurrent findings recorded by both the as well as the concurrent findings recorded by both the TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -10- - 22. The execution of the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 stands duly The execution of the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 stands duly The execution of the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 stands duly The execution of the agreement to sell dated 22.11.2017 stands duly proved on record. Both the marginal witnesses to the agreement were examined by proved on record. Both the marginal witnesses to the agreement were examined by proved on record. Both the marginal witnesses to the agreement were examined by proved on record. Both the marginal witnesses to the agreement were examined by the plaintiff and they categorically supported the case of execution, identifying the the plaintiff and they categorically supported the case of execution, identifying the the plaintiff and they categorically supported the case of execution, identifying the the plaintiff and they categorically supported the case of execution, identifying the ndant and affirming that the transaction was entered into for signatures of the defendant and affirming that the transaction was entered into for ndant and affirming that the transaction was entered into for signatures of the defe ₹3,00,000. Their testimony sale of the house in question for a total consideration of ₹3,00,000. Their testimony sale of the house in question for a total consideration of sale of the house in question for a total consideration of examination. The defendant has remained consistent and unshaken during cross-examination. The defendant has remained consistent and unshaken during cross has remained consistent and unshaken during cross , have admitted their signatures on the said herself, as well as her husband, have admitted their signatures on the said , have admitted their signatures on the said herself, as well as her husband ₹2,00,000 as earnest money through cheque drawn on agreement and the receipt of ₹2,00,000 as earnest money through cheque drawn on ₹2,00,000 as earnest money through cheque drawn on agreement and the receipt of below, upon detailed the State Bank of India, Jaitu Branch. Both the Courts below, upon detailed the State Bank of India, Jaitu Branch. Both the the State Bank of India, Jaitu Branch. Both the htly held that the execution scrutiny of the oral and documentary evidence, have rightly held that the execution scrutiny of the oral and documentary evidence, have rig scrutiny of the oral and documentary evidence, have rig of the agreement to sell is fully established and that the plaintiff has discharged the of the agreement to sell is fully established and that the plaintiff has discharged the of the agreement to sell is fully established and that the plaintiff has discharged the of the agreement to sell is fully established and that the plaintiff has discharged the burden of proving his case. burden of proving his case. 23. The contention now raised by the appellant that she was working as a The contention now raised by the appellant that she was working as a The contention now raised by the appellant that she was working as a The contention now raised by the appellant that she was working as a domestic servant in the house of the plaintiff and that the plaintiff, taking undue domestic servant in the house of the plaintiff and that the plaintiff, taking undue domestic servant in the house of the plaintiff and that the plaintiff, taking undue domestic servant in the house of the plaintiff and that the plaintiff, taking undue advantage of his dominating position, procured her signatures on the agreement to advantage of his dominating position, procured her signatures on the agreement to advantage of his dominating position, procured her signatures on the agreement to advantage of his dominating position, procured her signatures on the agreement to ght and has been raised for the first time in the present Regular sell, is an afterthought and has been raised for the first time in the present Regular ght and has been raised for the first time in the present Regular sell, is an afterthou Second Appeal. There is neither any such pleading in the written statement filed Second Appeal. There is neither any such pleading in the written statement filed Second Appeal. There is neither any such pleading in the written statement filed Second Appeal. There is neither any such pleading in the written statement filed before the trial court nor any evidence led during the trial to substantiate this plea. before the trial court nor any evidence led during the trial to substantiate this plea. before the trial court nor any evidence led during the trial to substantiate this plea. before the trial court nor any evidence led during the trial to substantiate this plea. Both the Courts have not found even a suggestion in the defendant’s Courts below have not found even a suggestion in the defendant’s have not found even a suggestion in the defendant’s deposition or in that of her witnesses that such a relationship of dominance existed deposition or in that of her witnesses that such a relationship of dominance existed deposition or in that of her witnesses that such a relationship of dominance existed deposition or in that of her witnesses that such a relationship of dominance existed or that the execution was obtained by undue influence. The plea that the agreement or that the execution was obtained by undue influence. The plea that the agreement or that the execution was obtained by undue influence. The plea that the agreement or that the execution was obtained by undue influence. The plea that the agreement cuted merely as security for a loan advanced to was in fact a paper transaction executed merely as security for a loan advanced to cuted merely as security for a loan advanced to was in fact a paper transaction exe the defendant is also without any foundation in the record. No document, witness, the defendant is also without any foundation in the record. No document, witness, the defendant is also without any foundation in the record. No document, witness, the defendant is also without any foundation in the record. No document, witness, or surrounding circumstance has been brought on record to show that any such or surrounding circumstance has been brought on record to show that any such or surrounding circumstance has been brought on record to show that any such or surrounding circumstance has been brought on record to show that any such TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -11- - ed as security. On the contrary, loan was advanced or that the document was intended as security. On the contrary, loan was advanced or that the document was intend loan was advanced or that the document was intend the evidence conclusively shows that the defendant voluntarily executed the the evidence conclusively shows that the defendant voluntarily executed the the evidence conclusively shows that the defendant voluntarily executed the the evidence conclusively shows that the defendant voluntarily executed the agreement and accepted the earnest money through cheque, which she later agreement and accepted the earnest money through cheque, which she later agreement and accepted the earnest money through cheque, which she later agreement and accepted the earnest money through cheque, which she later encashed. 24. that the The plea that the defendant had repaid the alleged loan and that the The plea that the defendant had repaid the alleged loan and The plea that the defendant had repaid the alleged loan and agreement was misused is equally baseless. The alleged account entry (Ex. D1) agreement was misused is equally baseless. The alleged account entry (Ex. D1) agreement was misused is equally baseless. The alleged account entry (Ex. D1) agreement was misused is equally baseless. The alleged account entry (Ex. D1) relied upon by the defendant does not connect to the plaintiff or his family in any relied upon by the defendant does not connect to the plaintiff or his family in any relied upon by the defendant does not connect to the plaintiff or his family in any relied upon by the defendant does not connect to the plaintiff or his family in any manner. There is no evidence to show that the said entry pertained to repayment of manner. There is no evidence to show that the said entry pertained to repayment of manner. There is no evidence to show that the said entry pertained to repayment of manner. There is no evidence to show that the said entry pertained to repayment of he money advanced under the agreement. The defence has failed to produce any the money advanced under the agreement. The defence has failed to produce any he money advanced under the agreement. The defence has failed to produce any he money advanced under the agreement. The defence has failed to produce any witness or document showing witness or document showing witness or document showing witness or document showing that that that that the money was returned, nor any the money was returned, nor any the money was returned, nor any the money was returned, nor any acknowledgment from the plaintiff regarding the alleged repayment. Thus, the acknowledgment from the plaintiff regarding the alleged repayment. Thus, the acknowledgment from the plaintiff regarding the alleged repayment. Thus, the acknowledgment from the plaintiff regarding the alleged repayment. Thus, the ng this contention are perfectly justified. findings of both Courts below rejecting this contention are perfectly justified. findings of both 25. As regards the requirement of readiness and willingness, the same As regards the requirement of readiness and willingness, the same As regards the requirement of readiness and willingness, the same As regards the requirement of readiness and willingness, the same also stands conclusively established on record. The plaintiff has specifically also stands conclusively established on record. The plaintiff has specifically also stands conclusively established on record. The plaintiff has specifically also stands conclusively established on record. The plaintiff has specifically form his part of the pleaded and proved that he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the pleaded and proved that he was always ready and willing to per pleaded and proved that he was always ready and willing to per Registrar, Jaitu, on the stipulated contract. He had attended the office of the Sub-Registrar, Jaitu, on the stipulated contract. He had attended the office of the Sub contract. He had attended the office of the Sub date, i.e., 20.11.2018, along with the balance sale consideration and requisite date, i.e., 20.11.2018, along with the balance sale consideration and requisite date, i.e., 20.11.2018, along with the balance sale consideration and requisite date, i.e., 20.11.2018, along with the balance sale consideration and requisite vit was expenses for registration. His presence was duly marked, and his affidavit was expenses for registration. His presence was duly marked, and his affida expenses for registration. His presence was duly marked, and his affida attested by the Executive Magistrate. Legal notice was also served upon the attested by the Executive Magistrate. Legal notice was also served upon the attested by the Executive Magistrate. Legal notice was also served upon the attested by the Executive Magistrate. Legal notice was also served upon the defendant, calling upon her to execute the sale deed. All these documents have defendant, calling upon her to execute the sale deed. All these documents have defendant, calling upon her to execute the sale deed. All these documents have defendant, calling upon her to execute the sale deed. All these documents have below have rightly held been duly exhibited on record as Exs. P2 to P8. The Courts below have rightly held been duly exhibited on record as Exs. P2 to P8. The been duly exhibited on record as Exs. P2 to P8. The evidence conclusively establishes that the plaintiff continuously that this evidence conclusively establishes that the plaintiff continuously evidence conclusively establishes that the plaintiff continuously evidence conclusively establishes that the plaintiff continuously maintained readiness and willingness to perform his contractual obligation. maintained readiness and willingness to perform his contractual obligation. maintained readiness and willingness to perform his contractual obligation. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -12- - 26. The contention of the appellant that the plaintiff did not have The contention of the appellant that the plaintiff did not have The contention of the appellant that the plaintiff did not have The contention of the appellant that the plaintiff did not have consideration is not supported by any sufficient financial means to pay the balance consideration is not supported by any consideration is not supported by any sufficient financial means to pay the balance evidence. The law does not require the plaintiff to prove availability of funds by evidence. The law does not require the plaintiff to prove availability of funds by evidence. The law does not require the plaintiff to prove availability of funds by evidence. The law does not require the plaintiff to prove availability of funds by producing cash in hand or a bank statement; it is sufficient if his conduct and producing cash in hand or a bank statement; it is sufficient if his conduct and producing cash in hand or a bank statement; it is sufficient if his conduct and producing cash in hand or a bank statement; it is sufficient if his conduct and below have evidence show genuine intent and capacity to perform. Both Courts below have evidence show genuine intent and capacity to perform. evidence show genuine intent and capacity to perform. correctly applied this settled principle while recording a concurrent finding in correctly applied this settled principle while recording a concurrent finding in correctly applied this settled principle while recording a concurrent finding in correctly applied this settled principle while recording a concurrent finding in favour of the plaintiff. favour of the plaintiff. 27. The argument that blank signed cheques of the defendant were The argument that blank signed cheques of the defendant were The argument that blank signed cheques of the defendant were The argument that blank signed cheques of the defendant were . No complaint or FIR obtained and misused by the plaintiff is also devoid of merit. No complaint or FIR obtained and misused by the plaintiff is also devoid of merit obtained and misused by the plaintiff is also devoid of merit has been proved to have been filed by the defendant at any stage alleging misuse or has been proved to have been filed by the defendant at any stage alleging misuse or has been proved to have been filed by the defendant at any stage alleging misuse or has been proved to have been filed by the defendant at any stage alleging misuse or forgery. The plea appears to be an afterthought and is contradicted by the forgery. The plea appears to be an afterthought and is contradicted by the forgery. The plea appears to be an afterthought and is contradicted by the forgery. The plea appears to be an afterthought and is contradicted by the ₹2,00,000 by cheque from the defendant’s own admission that she received ₹2,00,000 by cheque from the defendant’s own admission that she received defendant’s own admission that she received aintiff, which she encashed. Hence, this contention stands rightly repelled by plaintiff, which she encashed. Hence, this contention stands rightly repelled by aintiff, which she encashed. Hence, this contention stands rightly repelled by aintiff, which she encashed. Hence, this contention stands rightly repelled by both the Courts below. 28. It is further noted that both the Courts It is further noted that both the below have rightly granted the Courts below have rightly granted the y of main relief of specific performance and not the alternative relief of recovery of main relief of specific performance and not the alternative relief of recover main relief of specific performance and not the alternative relief of recover money. Once the execution of the agreement to sell, payment of earnest money, money. Once the execution of the agreement to sell, payment of earnest money, money. Once the execution of the agreement to sell, payment of earnest money, money. Once the execution of the agreement to sell, payment of earnest money, and continuous readiness and willingness of the plaintiff are established, the and continuous readiness and willingness of the plaintiff are established, the and continuous readiness and willingness of the plaintiff are established, the and continuous readiness and willingness of the plaintiff are established, the plaintiff becomes entitled to the enforcement of the contract. The grant of an plaintiff becomes entitled to the enforcement of the contract. The grant of an plaintiff becomes entitled to the enforcement of the contract. The grant of an plaintiff becomes entitled to the enforcement of the contract. The grant of an ief for recovery arises only if specific performance is found alternative relief for recovery arises only if specific performance is found ief for recovery arises only if specific performance is found ief for recovery arises only if specific performance is found inequitable or impracticable, which is not the case here. The defendant’s plea that inequitable or impracticable, which is not the case here. The defendant’s plea that inequitable or impracticable, which is not the case here. The defendant’s plea that inequitable or impracticable, which is not the case here. The defendant’s plea that the house is her only residential property does not, by itself, constitute a valid the house is her only residential property does not, by itself, constitute a valid the house is her only residential property does not, by itself, constitute a valid the house is her only residential property does not, by itself, constitute a valid defence against specific performance, as settled in defence against specific pe Rakesh Devi v. Sh. Ram and rformance, as settled in Rakesh Devi v. Sh. Ram and others, 2018 (3) CCC 196. others, 2018 (3) CCC 196 TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-3096-2025 2025 (O&M) -13- - Conclusion 29.
Decision
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. October 27, 2025 tripti , 2025 (MANDEEP PANNU MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE Whether speaking/non Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking speaking : Speaking : Yes/No. : Yes/No. Whether reportable Whether reportable TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document