VED PRAKASH YADAV Vs. NARYAN DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for condonation of delay of 20 days in filing IA No.11013/2010. In view of the submissions made therein, the application is allowed and the delay in filing IA No.11013/2010 is condoned. The application stands disposed of. Mr. Kirti Uppal, learned senior counsel, who appears on behalf of proposed LRs of deceased defendant no.1, states that he would appear on behalf of proposed LRs 1 to 3, who are already on record as defendants. Proposed LR. No.4 Mr. Vaibhav is also present in person. In view of the submissions made therein, the application is allowed and the persons mentioned in para 2 are brought on record as LRs of deceased defendant no.1. Amended memo of parties be filed. The application stands disposed of. The case of the plaintiff is that he purchased house measuring 7683 sq. yards bearing Khewal no.68/67, out of Khasra Nos. 53(3-15), 57(1-16) and 58(2-16) situated at Arjun Nagar, VIII Himayunpur, New Delhi vide documents such as an agreement to sell, receipt and General Power of Attorney dated 6.12.1999 and became owner by virtue of those documents coupled with vacant possession of the suit property. It is further alleged in the plaint that the defendant no.1 approached the plaintiff for purchase of the suit property and, though, the transaction could not be finalized, a settlement was reached between the parties whereby they stated and agreed as under:

(2.) IT is alleged in para 7 of the plaint that defendant no.1 with ulterior motive, got the property in question transferred to him from the plaintiff vide documents, details of which are not available with the plaintiff. IT is further alleged in para 8 of the plaint that in July, 2005, the plaintiff came to know that defendant no.1 had sold the property in question to the persons mentioned therein.

(3.) IT is settled preposition of law that while considering an application for rejection of the plaint, the Court can take into consideration only the averments made in the plaint and the documents filed by the plaintiff. Neither the defence taken in the written statement nor the documents filed by the defendant can be considered at this stage.