remedy as available to the petitioner-plaintiffs, was to institute a declaratory suit before the learned Civil Court of competent jurisdiction, for therebys theirs propagating a relief, that a decree of specific performance be rendered, thus in terms of agreement (Annexure P-2). Nevertheless, the vendees concerned took to rather institute a declaratory suit, cast under Section 11 of 'Act of 1961', thus before the Collector concerned. Apparently, the said declaratory suit was mis-constituted, as in the face of Annexure P-2, which is only an agreement to sell inter se the parties concerned, thereupon, unless, the said agreement to sell became successfully enforced through a declaratory suit becoming instituted before the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. Resultantly therebys, alone the plaintiffs concerned in a suit cast under Section 11 of the 'Act of 1961', could well rest a claim that thereby they be declared as owners, in possession of the suit lands. In other words, without theirs, thus recoursing the apt remedy (supra), as such, therebys the simpliciter suit for the makings of a declaratory decree merely founded upon, Annexure P-2, was but a completely misconstituted remedy.
