118 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-9118-2025 Date of Decision: March 23, 2026 Ram Singh …Pe..oner Versus Harvinder Singh …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate for the peoner. DEEPAK GUPTA , J.(Oral) Copy of the plaint as well as copy of the agreement has already been received, as per order dated 08.12.2025. 2. Peoner herein is the defendant of Civil Suit bearing CS No.1098 of 2022, tled as “Harvinder Singh v. Ram Singh”, pending before learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Kharar. 3. The suit was filed by the plainff, i.e. respondent herein seeking decree of specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 18.10.2018. An applicaon under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejecng the plaint was moved by the defendant-peoner on the ground that plainff had paid insufficient stamp duty on the document placed on record as agreement-cum-receipt and that agreement in queson was forged and fabricated. Rejecng the said contenon, the trial Court dismissed the applicaon for rejecng the plaint by way of impugned order dated 07.11.2025 (Annexure P-6), observing that plainff-respondent had shown his willingness to pay the sufficient stamp duty. 4. As far as the ground of the agreement being forged and fabricated is concerned, it is a ma;er of evidence to be adjudicated a<er the pares lead the evidence. SARITA RANI 2026.03.23 15:21 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order
CR-9118-2025 - 2 - 2026:PHHC:045226 5. Apart from above, learned counsel for the peoner submits that as per the agreement to sell, the target date for execuon of sale deed was 31.01.2019, whereas the suit was filed on 18.11.2022 and therefore the suit was clearly barred by limitaon. 6. A perusal of the applicaon (Annexure P-3) under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC would reveal that no such ground was raised by the peoner in that applicaon. 7. Apart from above, the perusal of the plaint would reveal that in para No.3, the plainff-respondent has specifically menoned that a<er execung the agreement, the defendant, i.e. peoner herein, received the part payment from me to me and last payment of
40,000/- was received on 02.01.2022. 8. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, it does not lie in the mouth of the peoner to contend that the suit filed in November 2022 is barred by limitaon. As such, there is no ground to interfere in the impugned order. The present revision peon is dismissed accordingly. March 23, 2026 (DEEPAK GUPTA) sarita JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No SARITA RANI 2026.03.23 15:21 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order