The High Court disposed of a second appeal where the appellant-challenger failed to succeed in challenging the specific performance decree regarding an agreement to sell. The court found the plaintiff proved evidence of readiness and willingness.
The second appeal was dismissed
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH
Regul ar Second Appeal No. 3339 of 2016 ( O&M) DATE OF DECI SI ON: 24. 05. 2018
Teekam
…. . Appel l ant
ver sus
Yogender Kumar Shar ma
CORAM: - HON' BLE MR. JUSTI CE AMI T RAWAL
Pr esent : Mr . B. S. Tewat i a, Advocat e f or t he appel l ant
AMI T RAWAL, J. ( Or al ) :
The appel l ant - def endant has not been successf ul i n def endi ng t he sui t f i l ed by t he r espondent / pl ai nt i f f cl ai mi ng speci f i c per f or mance of agr eement t o sel l dat ed 11. 02. 2007 whi ch has been decr eed wher eby t he appel l ant - def endant has been cal l ed upon t o execut e t he sal e deed on deposi t of t he bal ance sal e consi der at i on.
Parkash Chand 2018.05.25 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
RSA- 3339- 2016
- 2 -
pl ai nt i f f al so got an af f i davi t at t est ed f r om t he Execut i ve Magi st r at e.
Parkash Chand 2018.05.25 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
RSA- 3339- 2016
- 3 -
t hr ough t he t est i mony of at t est i ng wi t nesses. Hi s t humb- i mpr essi on has been pr oved t hr ough t he t est i mony of t he handwr i t i ng and si gnat ur e exper t . I n vi ew of such f act s, t he Cour t had no ot her occasi on but t o gr ant t he di scr et i onar y r el i ef f or t he sui t was f i l ed wi t hi n f ew days af t er t he expi r y of t he cut of f dat e i . e. 14. 05. 2007. Al l t hese f act or wei ghed i n t he mi nd enabl i ng t he Cour t t o f i nd t hat t he r espondent - pl ai nt i f f had been cont i nuousl y r eady and wi l l i ng t o per f or m hi s par t . The def endant has not been abl e t o r ebut t he di r ect and cogent evi dence l ed on behal f of t he pl ai nt i f f . The ar gument s of Mr . Tewat i a do not make out a case war r ant i ng i nt er f er ence i n t he concur r ent f i ndi ng of f act .
9. Di smi ssed.
( AMI T RAWAL) JUDGE
NOTE: Whet her speaki ng/ non- speaki ng: Speaki ng Whet her r epor t abl e: YES/ NO
Parkash Chand 2018.05.25 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent-plaintiff had continuously proved readiness and willingness to perform the agreement to sell.
Whether the trial court's finding in favour of the respondent was affected by errors of appreciation of evidence.
Teekam
Yogender Kumar Sharma
AMIT RAWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
