Dilbag Singh vs Gurchain Singh Dyal

Surjit Singh, J.—Defendant-appellant entered into an agreement with the plaintiff-respondent for sale of 17 marlas land, for a consideration of Rs. 34,000/ -. He did not abide by the agreement. So, a suit for specific performance of contract was filed. That suit was contested by the defendant-appellant and it was pleaded that the amount of Rs. 10,000/ -, as mentioned in the agreement, had not been paid, by way of earnest money. Also, it was stated that the sale consideration was much more than Rs. 34,000/ -.

Trial Court decreed the suit, to the extent of 1/3rd share of the defendant-appellant, in the land agreed to be sold, and passed a decree for specific performance of contract, to the extent of 1/3rd share of the defendant, on payment of a sum of Rs. 11,333/ -, or say one third of the agreed sale consideration. Appeal filed by the defendant in the Court of learned District Judge has been dismissed.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant.

It is submitted that when the plaintiff had claimed alternative relief of damages, the two Courts below ought not to have passed a decree for specific performance of the contract and instead it should have passed a decree for damages. Alternative relief was claimed by the plaintiff-respondent only in case his claim for relief of specific performance of contract, did not find favour with the Court. Since the two Courts below have found the plaintiff-respondent entitled to the relief of specific performance of contract, there was no need for examining the alternative plea of the plaintiff-respondent. Since no substantial question of law arises, appeal is dismissed.

In view of the dismissal of the appeal, pending application stands disposed of, having become infructuous.