MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA Vs. SAPNA & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE order dated 18.09.2012, the defendants were granted leave to contest the suit, subject to their filing an FDR or bank guarantee for Rs. 60 lacs to the satisfaction of the concerned Joint Registrar within two weeks from the date of the order. It was further directed that on failure of the defendants to file either FDR or bank guarantee of Rs. 60 lacs within two weeks, the application for leave to contest shall stand rejected. The Learned Counsel for the defendants states that the defendants are not in a position to furnish the bank guarantee or the FDR. Consequently, the application filed by the defendants for leave to contest the suit stands dismissed and the plaintiff is entitled to judgment forthwith. The case of the plaintiff is that defendant No. 1, who is the wife of defendant No. 2, agreed to sell her land comprised in Mauza Siwana, Siraska, Tehsil Sohana, District Gurgaon, Haryana to him for a consideration of Rs. 54 lakh and received that much amount by way of various cheques, detailed in para 5 of the plaint. An agreement dated 01.07.2008 was executed between the parties in this regard. Defendant No. 1 is alleged to have been executed a receipt, confirming the payment received from the plaintiff. It is further alleged that later on defendant No. 1 backed out of the agreement and refused to execute the sale document in favour of the plaintiff. She agreed to return the amount received from the plaintiff along with Rs. 60 lacs as compensation and for this purpose, defendants issued two cheques of Rs. 30 lakh each from their joint account and the agreement dated 01.07.2008 was returned to them along with original receipt. The cheques, when presented to the bank, were dishonoured with the endorsement "funds insufficient". The plaintiff has now claimed that amount of the aforesaid two cheques in the present suit filed under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that the defendants issued two cheques to the plaintiff and those cheques, when presented to the bank, were dishonoured. The Learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiff states that original cheques have been filed in proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The certified copies of the cheques are, however, on record. The plaintiff has also filed the bank memos evidencing return of the cheques by the banker of the defendants for want of insufficient funds. Being based on dishonoured cheques, this suit is maintainable under Order XXXVII of CPC. Hence, a decree for recovery of Rs. 60 lacs with pendente lite and future interest @ 6% per annum is, hereby passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.