RAJPAL Vs. HARSWAROOP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated 24.11.2010 which had reversed the finding of the trial Judge dated 01.12.2005. Vide judgment and decree dated 01.12.2005, the suit of the plaintiff seeking possession of the suit property i.e. property comprising of a shop no. D-61, Gali No. 4, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi, had been dismissed. Impugned judg-ment had reversed this finding; suit of the plaintiff stood decreed.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff is that the de-fendants had entered into an agreement to sell dated 13.11.1992 with the father of the plaintiff namely Sh. Mangat Ram for the purchase of the aforenoted suit property; to-tal consideration was Rs. 2,80,000/-; a sum of Rs. 1,05,000/- was paid to Sh. Mangat Ram; defendants agreed to pay the balance consideration on or before 13.09.1993. The balance amount was not paid. Defendants requested Sh. Mangat Ram to cancel the agreement; Sh. Mangat Ram returned a sum of Rs. 80,000/- to defendant No. 2 and ad-justed Rs.25,000/- as use and occupation charges for the possession of shop. Defen-dant No. 2 executed an agreement cum re-ceipt dated 01.07.1995 for the cancellation of the said agreement. Defendants had agreed to vacate the property within 3-4 months and latest by 31.10.1995. Sh. Mangat Ram ex-pired on 21.04.1997. In spite of requests of the plaintiff to the defendant to vacate the suit property as also the legal notice dated 22.12.2001; defendants failed to adhere to the said request. Present suit seeking posses-sion of the suit shop as also damages at the rate ofRs. 5000/- per month was claimed.

(3.) In the written statement, it was con-tended that the plaintiff had no locus standi to file the present suit. It was barred by limi-tation. Defence of the defendants was that they had made payment of the balance amount on 15.11.1992 and on 30.11.1992;