Case Name: Waryam Singh Lambardar (through LRs) v. Gurbax Singh & Ors.
Date of Judgment: January 9, 2020
Citation: RSA No. 983 of 1988
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amol Rattan Singh
Held: The High Court restored the trial court’s decree of specific performance of an agreement to sell agricultural land, reversing the first appellate court’s denial of possession. It held that the plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part, while the defendant sought an additional sum beyond the agreed rate without any written contract. Any such oral arrangement to avoid stamp duty was unenforceable under Sections 23–24 of the Contract Act. Subsequent purchasers who bought the land during pendency of litigation could not claim protection, as the principle of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act applied.
Summary: The plaintiff, Waryam Singh, entered into an agreement on 10.04.1981 with the defendant for sale of 7 kanals 13 marlas at ₹21,000 per acre. He paid ₹5,600 earnest money and remained ready to complete the sale. On 03.07.1981/09.07.1981 both parties appeared before the Sub-Registrar, but the defendant refused unless an additional ₹4,800 was paid. The trial court decreed specific performance, but the first appellate court reversed it, limiting relief to refund of earnest money with interest. In second appeal, the High Court found the appellate reasoning perverse as there was no evidence of revised consideration, and oral settlements to defeat stamp duty were void. It also held that subsequent purchasers from 1986, impleaded in 2014, could not escape the decree as they were either aware of the pending litigation or deemed bound by lis pendens. Given the appellants’ diligence in prosecuting the case, delay could not defeat their rights.
Decision: Appeal allowed. Trial court decree restored. Plaintiffs entitled to specific performance, subject to paying the subsequent purchasers the consideration mentioned in their 1986 sale deed with 9% interest from that date, within 4 months.