MADAN LAL KHURANA Vs. SUDESH BATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated 22.11.2003 which had endorsed the finding of the trial judge dated 19.4.2001 whereby the suit filed by the Plaintiff Madan Lal Khurana seeking specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 19.8.1975 (Ex.PW-1/1) as also a declaration and permanent injunction to the effect that the Defendant be injuncted from interfering in the premises i.e. Half of property bearing No. E-30, Block-II, Railway Colony, Greater Kailash, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit property') had been dismissed.

(2.) This is a second appeal. The parties are closely related. Plaintiff Madan Lal Khurana has since expired. He is represented by his widow Raj Rani Khurana, she is the niece of the Defendant Sudesh Batra. The case of the Plaintiff as is evident from the pleadings is that the parties had entered into an agreement to sell on 19.8.1975 by virtue of which the Defendant agreed to sell half of the suit property in favour of the Plaintiff. The Defendant had been allotted the whole plot No. E-30, Block-II, Railway Colony, Greater Kailash Enclave-II, New Delhi from EP Railway Refugee Rehabilitation and House Building Cooperative Society Limited; the demand raised upon the Defendant was Rs. 15,066/-, he was not able to fulfill the entire demand; the Plaintiff agreed to pay 50% of the said amount i.e. Rs. 7,533/- for half of the undivided plot. In lieu of the Plaintiff having agreed to make half payment of the demand upon the Defendant the affronted agreement to sell Ex.PW-1/1 had been entered into between the parties. This is an admitted document.

(3.) The defence of the Defendant in the courts below was that he had cancelled this agreement to sell which has been executed between the parties. Suit filed by the Plaintiff in April 1989 was time barred as the cancellation of the afore noted document had been communicated by him vide his communication dated 12.6.1984 (Ex.DW-1/1).