Dismissed

Farid v. Mamta

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Dec 2014RSA/1246/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This second appeal challenged the decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell land. The appellant argued he was illiterate and never received earnest money due to a concurrent mortgage. The court found facts proved execution of both documents and dismissed the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Proceeding of regular second appeal dismissed with a finding that no substantial question of law arises.

Farid Vs Mamta — Specific Performance | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

RSA No.1246 of 2012 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

RSA No.1246 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.12.2014

Farid

... Appellant

Vs.

Smt. Mamta

... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶11

Present:Mr. J.S.Hooda, Advocate for the appellant.

¶12

AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL)

¶13

At the instance of defendant-appellant, the present regular second appeal is directed against the judgments and decrees of both the Courts below whereby the suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 22.05.2006 in respect of the land measuring 5 kanals 5 marlas has been decreed.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defendantappellant submits that on the same very day of execution and registration of sale deed, mortgage deed dated 22.05.2006 was also executed between the parties to lis and the mortgage amount was `1 lakh. He further submits that since the defendant-appellant is illiterate person and therefore, the stamp paper, which is alleged to have been purchased by him, in respect of mortgage deed and not in respect of agreement to sell and therefore, he did not append the

¶15

SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2014.12.23 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶16

RSA No.1246 of 2012 (O&M)

¶17

¶18

signatures on the agreement to sell nor received earnest money of `1 lakh. He also submits that this aspect has gone uncontradicted and therefore, findings of both the Courts below suffer from illegality much less perversity.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the defendant-appellant and appraised the impugned judgments and decrees of both the Courts below.

¶20

The argument of the learned counsel for the defendantappellant on going through the judgments and decrees of both the Courts below does not have any legs to stand as the factum of mortgage deed was admitted by the plaintiff-respondent. It is not a case of defendant-appellant that said stamp paper has been used for an agreement to sell. There are two separate documents which have been executed between the parties. One is agreement to sell dated 22.05.2006 and second is registered mortgage deed of even date. The defendant-appellant is taking advantage of execution of the documents on the same date. Thus, both the Courts below have rendered finding on the basis of oral much less documentary evidence on record and found that execution of the agreement to sell has been proved much less readiness and willingness, at the instance of the plaintiff-respondent has also been proved and exercised the powers under Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act by ordering execution of sale in favour of plaintiff-respondent.

¶21

In view of observation made herein above, there is no

¶22

SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2014.12.23 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶23

RSA No.1246 of 2012 (O&M)

¶24

¶25

merit in the aforementioned argument.

¶26

No substantial question of law arises for adjudication of

¶27

this appeal.

¶28

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

¶29

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE

¶30

December 19, 2014 savita

¶31

SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2014.12.23 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Farid v. Mamta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Farid v. Mamta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Punjab Vs Ran Singh

Kamlesh Rani Vs Parsin Kaur

Madan Lal Vs Tara Chand & Anr.

Vinod Kumar Vs Kamaljit Singh

Jagtar Singh and Ors. Vs Gardaur Singh and Ors.

Jiwa Singh Vs M/S Bihari Lal & Co. & Anr.