Ram Bhagat vs Ishwar

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ram Bhagat vs Ishwar on 2 August, 2024

                                        Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099025




130      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
                                  RSA-1846-2024 (O&M)
                                  Date of Decision: August 02, 2024

Ram Bhagat                                      ... Appellant

                    Versus

Ishwar                                          ...Respondent

CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

Present:-     Mr. Sandeep Parkash Chahar, Advocate for the appellant.

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.(Oral)

Appellant was defendant before the trial Court in Civil Suit No.148 of 2016, 'tled as "Ishwar v. Ram Bhagat". The suit was ﬁled by plain'ﬀ - Ishwar (respondent herein) seeking speciﬁc performance on the basis of agreement to sell dated 04.12.2015 in respect of property in dispute. By way of judgment dated 19.09.2019, trial Court declined the relief of speciﬁc performance, but decreed the suit to the eﬀect that plain'ﬀ-respondent shall be en'tled to recover the amount of `13,21,000/-, i.e. earnest money from the defendant (appellant) along with interest @ 6% per annum, w.e.f. 31.12.2015 'll its realiza'on. The appeal ﬁled by the appellant-defendant was dismissed by the First Appellate Court on 18.04.2024 and thus defendant is against the concurrent ﬁndings of the Courts below.

2. The grievance of the defendant-appellant as put forth by learned counsel is that suit for recovery of `13,21,000/- has been wrongly decreed. Learned counsel contends that as per s'pula'on in the agreement, in case the vendee fails to get the sale deed executed on the target date, then the earnest money paid by him, shall be forfeited. Learned counsel contends that though, the Courts below gave the ﬁndings that plain'ﬀ-respondent had failed to prove the readiness and willingness on his part, therefore, the suit for refund of earnest money could not have been decreed.





                                       1 of 2
                    ::: Downloaded on - 04-08-2024 11:16:18 :::
                                         Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099025




RSA-1846-2024 (O&M)                                            2024:PHHC:099025

                                 -2-

3. A=er hearing learned counsel for the appellant-defendant and going through the paper book, I do not ﬁnd any merit in the present appeal.

4. As conceded by learned counsel for the appellant-defendant, who is the vendor in the agreement to sell, the property in dispute was under mortgage with the bank and it was his (vendor's) duty to clear all the dues of the bank to get the mortgage cancelled and to obtain 'No Objec'on Cer'ﬁcate' from the bank prior to execu'on of the sale deed. Although, it is contended by learned counsel for the appellant-defendant that appellant-defendant had paid the dues of the bank, but it is conceded that the appellant-defendant failed to obtain 'No Objec'on Cer'ﬁcate' from the concerned bank up to the target date for the execu'on of the sale deed.

5. In the face of the aforesaid facts and circumstances when the vendor-defendant-appellant failed to perform his part of contract as was s'pulated in the agreement to sell, he cannot ques'on the readiness and willingness on the part of the plain'ﬀ-respondent.

6. As such, ﬁnding no merit in the present appeal, the same is hereby dismissed.

August 02, 2024                                  (DEEPAK GUPTA)
sarita                                                JUDGE
                    Whether reasoned/speaking:        Yes/No
                    Whether reportable:               Yes/No




                                       2 of 2
                   ::: Downloaded on - 04-08-2024 11:16:18 :::