GOPAL JOHARI Vs. ANUP DIWAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order, I propose to decide application under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC filed by the defendants No.1 and 2 for rejection of the plaint.

(2.) The facts are that the plaintiff has filed the present suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 12 th November, 2002 which was executed in respect of the property bearing No.171/S-25, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi.

(3.) The main contention of the defendants No.1 and 2 in the application is that as per the agreement dated 12 th November, 2002, the defendant No.1 was to obtain the sale permission from L&DO within 90 days period and then to execute the sale deed and the balance consideration of Rs.32 lac was payable at the time of execution of the sale deed. It is further averred that as alleged by the plaintiff, the defendant No.1 failed to obtain the sale permission within the period of 90 days from the date of agreement. The period of 90 days expired on 11 th February, 2003. Accordingly, the cause of action in favour of the plaintiff accrued on or before 12 th February, 2003. The contention of the learned counsel for the defendants No.1 and 2 is that under Article 54 of the Limitation Act, the suit for specific performance could have been filed on or before 10 th February, 2006/11 th February, 2006 but the present suit has been filed on 8 th February, 2007 or thereafter. Therefore, the suit has been filed beyond the period of limitation and the same is liable to be rejected under Order VII, Rule 11 (d) CPC.