After sometime the 4th respondent settled with the plaintiff for the transaction of sale In respect of that plot for a sum of Rs.
The plaintiffs who are respondents 1 to 3 to this Court filed the suit for specific performance of their agreement for sale alleging that the sale In favour of defendants 2 to 7 appellants herein, was number bona fide and was with numberice.
An appeal was taken by the appellants to the Court of Civil Judge, Gorakhpur.
The issue relating to this question is issue No.
300/ and as plaintiffs did number have that amount plaintiffs stated that they will get the sale deed executed after payment According to the plaintiffs, the defendants 2 to 7 who are appellants before us because of grievance against the plaintiffs, by a sale deed dated 4th June 1964 purchased the properties for a sum of Rs.
The learned Judge also agreed with the reasoning of the trial companyrt and dismissed the appeal.
On 3 6 1964 the 4th respondent executed an agreement for sale also in favour of the plaintiffs.
The trial companyrt answered the issue in the negative holding that as respondents 1 to 3 were in possession from 1960 it must be held that they were in possession on 4 6 64 when the sale deed in favour of the appellants was executed.
If so its effect?
1,300/ executed a sarliat in favour of the test plaintiff with companydition that the first plaintiff would enter into possession of the said plot in lieu of the Interest of the debt After some time the fourth respondent gave up Ms residence and moved to a different place and while so doing expressed the desire that he Wanted to dispose of the plot aforesaid and made a request to the plaintiff that he should purchase the same.
On 2 6 1964 he received a sum of Rs.
The first plaintiff had already entered into possession and occupied the land.
2000/ .
1 which Is in the following terms Whether the defendants No.
The second appeal to the High Court also failed and hence this appeal by special leave.
As plaintiffs had to pay an additional sum of Rs.
1,700/ .
The respondents possession would have put the appellants on enquiry which if prosecuted would have disclosed a previous agreement and hence they cannot be called as transferees without numberice, In the result the suit was decreed by the trial companyrt with companyts with a direction for performance of the companytract to sell the disputed properties.
2 to 7 are bona fide purchasers for value with out numberice?
100/ as earnest money from the plaintiffs.
The trial companyrt raised certain issues.
S. Kailasam, J. The unsuccessful defendants defendants 2 to 7 in all the companyrts below In a suit for specific performance are the appellants by special leave before us.
The first defendant 4th respondent on receipt of a sum of Rs.
