possession of the suit land was handed over by the defendants No.1 to 3 to the appellants herein on the day the agreement for sale was executed on 1/3/1999, then how could they (defendants No.1 to 3) be heard to say that they were intending to sell the suit land to the plaintiffs on getting it measured. The trial Court has found it to be an interesting fact that the sale consideration mentioned in the agreement dated 1/3/1999 is Rs.8,11,000/-. Whereas the amount of consideration mentioned in the agreement for sale for the enforcement of which this suit is filed, is Rs.7,51,000/-. The trial Court has rightly observed, as to how cum the vendor who agreed to sell the suit land for Rs.8,11,000/-, would agree to receive the consideration amount lesser than the one mentioned in the agreement (Exh.122). True, a public notice was shown to have been issued at the instance of the appellants before the sale deed was executed. It was published in a weekly, published from Kopargaon itself. The trial Court, on appreciation of the evidence in the case, has rightly observed the agreement (Exh.122) to have been antidated and executed only with a view to defeat the plaintiff’s right under the agreement for sale dated 31/12/1999. This Court finds no reason to take a different view on reappreciation of the evidence in the suit. As such, the trial
