Singh was a rustic and illiterate person whereas the plaintiffs were very clever persons and instead of mentioning the name of village Faqarsar in the agreement to sell, they mentioned the land situated in village Dabwali Rahurianwali. When they came to know that they will not be successful in the fraud, they compelled and forced the defendant to execute the sale deed with regard to 12 Kanals of land situated in village Faqarsar, which was free from any dispute, in their favour on 17.08.2004 for a sale consideration of �� 3,16,500, out of which the defendant had already received a sum of � 3.00 lakh as earnest money vide agreement to sell dated 02.08.2004 and received the balance sale consideration of �� 16,500 from the plaintiffs prior to registration of the sale deed dated 17.08.2004; and in this way part of the earnest money received vide agreement to sell dated 02.08.2004 was adjusted at the time of execution of the sale deed dated 17.08.2004 and thus, the fraud, as alleged that defendant-Jugraj Singh never agreed to sell the land at village Dabwali Rahurianwali, is proved. Moreover, the appellants had moved an application for leading additional evidence before the lower appellate Court to produce and prove on record the copy of the sale deed dated 17.08.2004 to prove the aforesaid facts; however, the same was declined by the said Court illegally. Since the said application was allowed along with the main appeal, the appellants are well within their right to raise such an issue before this Court.
