LAWS(DLH)-2010-1-136

TIGER SINGH Vs. MANJEET KAUR

Decided On January 08, 2010
TIGER SINGH Appellant
V/S
MANJEET KAUR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Execution is sought of the compromise decree dated 23rd January, 2009 in CS(OS)2285/2007. The decree holder seeks directions for signing /execution of the documents for conversion of lease hold rights in the land underneath the property No.C-6/31, Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi subject matter of the decree into free hold. The decree holder further seeks a direction to the respondents/judgment debtors to sign the plans for redevelopment of the first, second and third floor of property No.C-6/31, Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi and directions to the respondents/judgment debtors not to obstruct in the said redevelopment.

(2.) The parties being closely related to each other, attempts were made to bring about an amicable settlement. However, the same failed. During the said attempts directions were orally issued for free hold conversion and at present no further directions are deemed necessary with respect thereto. Suffice it is to clarify that if in terms of the oral directions, the free hold conversion to which neither of the parties has any objection, does not happen and anything further is required to be done with respect thereto, the parties shall be at liberty to approach the court. Till now this court has hesitated from appointing a commissioner with authority to sign all documents and do all acts on behalf of the parties in this regard, for the reason of the costs which the parties will have to bear of such commission. The parties are, however, warned that if they do not mutually resolve the aspect of free hold conversion in terms of the compromise decree, this court shall have to appoint a commissioner for the said purpose and the costs whereof shall have to be borne by the parties.

(3.) The main issue between the parties is as to the right of the petitioner/decree holder to redevelop the first, second and upper floor of the property. EA.No. 460/2009 in the form of objections has been filed by the respondents/judgment debtors in this regard only.