REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

PROMILLA SETHI Appellant

V/S

INDER NARAIN Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

S.V.R. MUDALIAR (DEAD) BY LRS. AND OTHERS V. MRS. RAJABU F. BUHARI (DEAD) BY LRS. AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
VAN HATZFELDT-WILDENBURG V. ALEXANDER [REFERRED TO]
BOLLA NARAYANA MURTHY V. CANNAMANEEDI.MADHAVAYYA AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
DALSUKH M. PANCHOLI V. THE GUARANTEE LIFE AND EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
PC VERGHESE V. DEVAKI AMMA BATAMBIKA DEVI AND OTHERS,AIR [REFERRED TO]
KALYANPUR LIME WORKS LIMITED VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
CHANDNEE WIDYA VATI MADDEN VS. C L KATIAL [REFERRED TO]
KOLLIPARA SRIRAMULU DEAD VS. T ASWATHA NARAYANA DEAD [REFERRED TO]
JIWAN LAL VS. BRIJ MOHAN MEHRA [REFERRED TO]
SARDARSINGH VS. KRISHNA DEVI [REFERRED TO]
GIAN CHAND VS. GOPALA [REFERRED TO]
KANSHI RAM VS. OM PRAKASH JAWAL [REFERRED TO]
K S VIDYANADAM VS. VAIRAVAN [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA KUMARI VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
K NARENDRA VS. RIVIERA APARTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
SURJIT KAUR VS. NAURATA SINGH [REFERRED TO]
NIRMALA ANAND VS. ADVENT CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
M V SHANKAR BHAT VS. CLAUDE PINTO [REFERRED TO]
HPA INTERNATIONAL VS. BHAGWANDAS FATEH CHAND DASWANI [REFERRED TO]
P DSOUZA VS. SHONDRILO NAIDU [REFERRED TO]
SHANMUGHASUNDARAM VS. DIRAVIA NADAR [REFERRED TO]
SURINDER SINGH VS. KAPOOR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
TRANSCORE VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAM NIWAS VS. OMKARI [REFERRED TO]
PURNIMA RANI VS. LAKSHMI BALA DASI [REFERRED TO]
RAMANI AMMAL VS. SUSILAMMAL [REFERRED TO]
T K SANTHA VS. A G RATHNAM [REFERRED TO]
R RAMANA REDDI VS. RBABU REDDI [REFERRED TO]
MOTILAL VS. NANHELAL [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NON performance of a 44 year old agreement resulting in filing of the suit and the present appeal has witnessed not only the original contracting parties but members of their next generations also expire, and thus, this Appeal has been flooded with endless applications for substitution of legal heirs of both the Appellants and the Respondents. The delay not only led to the legal heirs being substituted but also the Appellants assigning their rights to a third party in the present appeal against the impugned judgment and decree dated 3rd October, 1974 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court.

(2.) BRIEF facts relevant to the present appeal are that on 30th May/2nd June, 1966, Ram Lal Anand (hereinafter called "the vendor") entered into an agreement with one Keshav Swarup Bhatnagar (hereinafter called "the vendee") for the sale of his house No. 4-D, Ata-ur-Rehman Lane, Underhill Road, Delhi for a sum of Rs. 3,55,000/-. A sum of Rs. 30,000/- by way of cheque was paid as earnest money and the balance was to be paid at the time of registration of the sale deed or before by mutual agreement. The relevant portions of the agreement to sell Ex. P-203, entered into between the parties are:-

(3.) THE parties exchanged letters in between and on 4th/8th October, 1966, the vendor wrote a letter Ex. P-26 to the vendee asking him to submit a proper draft sale deed in consonance with the terms of agreement dated 2nd June, 1966 together with remittance of Rs. 1,55,000/- by a draft of an approved bank within a fortnight and if he failed to do so, the agreement shall be deemed to have been cancelled. On 5th November, 1966, the vendor wrote a letter to the vendee stating that the agreement dated 2nd June, 1966 stands rescinded and that he could treat the vendee as a tenant of the rooms vacated by him on 15th June, 1966 and occupied by the vendee. On 23rd November, 1966, the vendor died.

Click here to view full judgment.

PROMIILA SETHI Vs. INDER NARAIN

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address