proposal was accepted and late Shri Prabhucharan deposited Rs. 1 lac on 8.8.1994 with Diesis of Rajasthan. Thereafter the office bearers of the Church took the decision that disputed property be sold to late Shri Prabhucharan against the consideration of Rs. 5 lacs and for the purpose of construction of a guest house for which 200 square yards of land be kept. In that regard on 9.10.1997 on behalf of the Church, a letter was addressed to late Shri Prabhucharan and late Shri Prabhucharan accepted the proposal and the amount of sale consideration was paid. During this period, on 10.1.2000 Prabhucharan expired. It has been pleaded by plaintiff No. 1 that he paid to the contesting defendant his share amount to the tune of Rs. 75,000 on 14.3.2002 followed by payment of Rs. 75,000 on 7.5.2002. In total he paid to the contesting defendant an amount to the tune of Rs. 1,50,000/-. The contesting defendant No. l issued a receipt of the aforesaid amount on 9.9.2002 and the said receipt was duly notarized. The plaintiffs No. 2 to 4 also paid the amount of their share to the tune of Rs. 1 lac to the contesting defendant. The receipt of the same was issued on 4.3.2002. It has further been pleaded that as per terms and conditions of the agreement when the sale deed was not executed relating to the disputed property, the plaintiff and defendants, being legal heirs of late Shri Prabhucharan, a legal notice through counsel was sent on 29.10.2001. However, after above referred legal notice when the office bearers of the Church did not execute the sale deed, the parties instituted a suit through contesting defendant Prem Kumar for specific performance of contract against the Church wherein the plaintiff and the proforma respondents were impleaded as proforma respondents. With
