RSA No.3462 of 2006 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
RSA No.3462 of 2006 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 01.07.2009
Ram Chand
...Appellant
VERSUS
Surinder Pal
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
Present: Mr. M. S. Rai, Advocate
for the appellant.
***
AJAY TEWARI J.
The plaintiff has filed this appeal against concurrent judgment
of the courts below whereby, in a suit for specific performance the alternate
relief of refund of consideration plus penalty has been ordered. Learned
counsel for the appellant has framed as many as five questions of law which
are reproduced herein below:-
1. “Whether notice u/s 79 of the Cooperative Society Act
was necessary before filing the present suit when the
land in question is mortgage with the P.A.D. Bank or
not?
2. Whether defendant no.2/respondent No.2 is protected
u/s 41 of the transfer of property act or not?
3. Whether the suit is maintainable when the
plaintiff/respondent is not claiming for possession of
RSA No.3462 of 2006 (O&M) -2-the suit land or not?
4. Whether the alleged agreement dated 01.02.97 is
forged and fabricated document or not?
5. Whether the suit filed by plaintiff/respondent is time
barred or not?”
As regards questions No.1 and 2, in my opinion any such plea
only can be taken by the mortgagee and not by the appellant.
As regards question No.3, it has to be noticed that the suit for
specific performance has not been decreed, only alternate relief has been
granted.
As regards question No.4, it is the only question on which
arguments have been addressed but the said question is a pure question of
fact. It has not been shown to me that the finding arrived thereon is
perverse.
As regards question No.5, arguments have not been addressed.
In the circumstances, this appeal is dismissed. No costs.
( AJAY TEWARI )
July 01, 2009 JUDGE
ashish