P&H High Court Dismisses Second Appeal; Holds Specific Performance Cannot Be Avoided by Claim of Intoxication

Case Name: Beant Singh (deceased) through LRs vs. Bikramjit Singh and Others
Date of Judgment: 10 November 2025
Citation: RSA-3708-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta

Held: The Punjab & Haryana High Court upheld concurrent decrees directing specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 19.06.2018. The Court held that the defendant admitted receipt of ₹16 lakh as earnest money and admitted his signatures on the agreement. It ruled that the burden to prove incapacity or intoxication rested on the defendant, but he produced no medical or credible evidence. The Court found no perversity in the finding that the intoxication plea was an afterthought. It also held that non-examination of the scribe, relationship of an attesting witness, location of execution, or alleged hardship did not undermine the agreement or the plaintiffs’ readiness and willingness.

Summary: The plaintiffs sought specific performance of the 2018 agreement to sell agricultural land for ₹19 lakh per killa. They appeared before the Sub-Registrar on 20.08.2018, but the defendant did not. The defendant claimed the agreement was fabricated and that his signatures were taken while he was intoxicated. Both Courts rejected this defence after noting admitted cheque encashment, consistent signatures across all pages, and no supporting evidence of intoxication. They also relied on the defendant’s history of land transactions and financial stability to reject the hardship plea. In second appeal, the defendant repeated old arguments, but the Court held that no substantial question of law arose. It ruled that the agreement was duly proved and that plaintiffs remained ready and willing, while the defendant was in breach.

Decision: The Regular Second Appeal was dismissed. The judgments and decrees of the Trial Court and First Appellate Court were affirmed. All pending applications were disposed of.