The suit was resisted by all the defendants.
250 per marla.
Pindidas admitted having entered into a companytract of sale of some land to the plaintiff on October 1, 1945 and of having received Rs.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated October 14, 1957 of the Punjab High Court in R.F.A. No.
Ram Lubhaya and S. D. Sekhri, for respondents Nos.
K. Mehta and K. L. Mehta, for respondents Nos.
The companytract in this regard was entered into on October 1, 1945 with Pindidas and Rs.
175 per marla for the land which he purchased from Devisahai.
C. Chatterjee, H. L. Mittal, S. S. Khanduja and Ganpat Rai, for the appellant.
133 of the Constitution.
He, therefore, approached Pindidas in the matter and the latter agreed to sell the 3/20th share be longing to the family at the rate of Rs.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
He thus became owner of 17/20th share in this land.
7 of 1962.
According to the plaintiff he paid Rs.
On October 1, 1943 he purchased 23/120th share in this land belonging to one Devisahai.
January 27, 1964.
13 15.
In order to companysolidate his holding, the plaintiff desired to acquire the 3/20th share held by the joint family of Pindidas and his brothers.
Aggrieved by the dismissal of his claim for specific perfor mance the plaintiff has companye up to this Court by a certi ficate granted by the High Court, under Art.
494, 495, 496, 497, 1800/501, 1801/501 and 529 shown in the zamabandi of 1943 43, situate at Mauza Faizpur of Batala.
As the manager of the family failed to execute the sale deed in his favour, the plaintiff instituted the suit and made Pindidas and his brothers defendants thereto.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MUDHOLKAR J. This is a plaintiffs appeal from the dismissal of his suit for specific performance of a companytract for the sale of 3/20th share of land in certain fields situate in Mauza Faizpur of Batala in the State of Punjab.
The remaining 3/20th share belongs to the joint Hindu family of which Pindidas was the Manager and his brother Haveliram Khemchand and Satyapal were the members.
100 were paid to him as earnest money.
The relevant facts are these The plaintiff owned 79/120th share in Kasra Nos.
219 of 1950.
