MEGH NATH Vs. RAJNISH GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned judgment of the Trial Court dated 29.7.2011 decreeing the suit of the respondent/plaintiff, not for double the amount of earnest money of Rs.3,00,000/- i.e. Rs.6,00,000/- as prayed for, but only for the earnest amount of money of Rs.3,00,000/- alongwith interest at 8% per annum.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the appellants/defendants and the respondent/plaintiff entered into an agreement to sell dated 27.7.2009 whereby the respondent/plaintiff agreed to purchase the second floor without roof rights of the property no.11, Pocket-1, Sector 20, Rohini, Delhi admeasuring 48 sq. yds. Pursuant to the agreement to sell, an advance amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was paid and the balance sum of Rs.14,00,000/- was payable on or before 10.9.2009. THE respondent/plaintiff pleaded that the construction of the suit property could not be done within the stipulated time frame, i.e. uptill 10.9.2009 and the appellants/defendants in spite of repeated requests to complete the construction and execute the title document after receiving balance payment, avoided to do so on one pretext or the other. When the appellants/defendants ultimately refused to execute the documents, the subject suit came to be filed for recovery of double the amount of earnest money paid. THE respondent/plaintiff thereafter is said to have gone to the office of the sub-Registrar on 10.9.2009 but the appellants/defendants failed to appear. It was pleaded that the appellants/defendants wrongly forfeited the earnest money. THE respondent/plaintiff is said to have replied to the legal notice dated 17.9.2009 issued by the appellants/defendants, by his reply dated 30.9.2009 wherein double the amount of advance money was asked for.

(3.) WITH respect to issue no.2, the Trial Court has held that the respondent/plaintiff did not have arrangement to pay the balance amount of Rs.14,00,000/- and hence failed to perform his part of the contract. Issue no.3 was also decided against the respondent/plaintiff. So far as the issue no.1 pertaining to the claim of Rs.6,00,000/-, i.e. double the amount of earnest money of Rs.3,00,000/- the Trial Court decreed the suit for the amount of earnest money of Rs.3,00,000/- by making the following observations: