PODDAR CONSTRUCTION PRIV LTD Vs. SEEMA BANSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT by the present appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) seeks to challenge the impugned judgment and decree dated 13.5.1998 whereby the suit of the respondent/plaintiff for specific performance was decreed against the appellant-defendant company.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that an agreement titled as a Receipt? dated 11.8.1984 containing the terms of sale and purchase was entered into between the appellant as seller and the respondent as buyer with respect to a plot of land bearing K.No. 772(4-0), 765/2(1-6) measuring 1.107 acres situated in village Kapasehra, Tehsil Mehrauli, Delhi. THE total price which was agreed upon was Rs.2,65,000/- and an advance of Rs.10,000/- was paid to the appellant-defendant at the time of entering of the agreement to sell. THE balance of Rs.2,55,000/- was payable within six months or within 60 days of the appellant/defendant obtaining the necessary certificates from the Income Tax Authority and the Urban Land Ceiling Authority. THE case of the respondent/plaintiff is that the appellant was dilly-dallying in the performance of its obligations under the contract and it was not getting the permissions or executing the sale deed with respect to the subject land in favour of the respondent. An important aspect is that possession of the property was delivered to the respondent buyer at the time of entering into the agreement to sell. THE appellant had at one point of time sought to contend that the respondent plaintiff had criminally trespassed into the property and physical possession was not handed over however, the admitted fact is that no criminal proceedings for criminal prosecution of the respondent/plaintiff was ever initiated by the appellant seller considering that taking illegal possession of the property is indeed a very serious matter.

(3.) ON completion of pleadings, the following issues were framed by the trial court .