ARUN NIRULA Vs. K.N. JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal impugns the order dated 14th December, 2004 of the Court of the Additional District Judge (ADJ), Delhi of rejection of plaint in Suit No.359/2003 filed by the appellants for specific performance of an Agreement of Sale of immovable property and for recovery of possession thereof and in the alternative for recovery of damages in the sum of Rs.15 lakhs jointly and severally from the four respondents/defendants, and the consequent decree of dismissal of suit.

(2.) The appeal was admitted for hearing and vide ex-parte ad-interim order dated 23rd May, 2005, the respondents restrained from creating any third party interest in the suit property. Only the respondents No.3 & 4 namely Mr. Balbir Singh and Mr. Satvir Singh appeared in response to the notice and the respondents No.1 & 2 namely Mr. K.N. Jain and Mr. P.K. Padmanabhan failed to appear inspite of service by publication. Finding no order till now of proceeding ex-parte against the respondents No.1 & 2, they are now ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte. The respondent No.3 Mr. Balbir Singh died on 4th February, 2012 during the pendency of the appeal and an application for substitution of his legal heirs was filed. Vide order dated 15th July, 2013, his legal heirs were substituted. The appellants filed CM No.8181/2013 for deletion of the name of the appellant No.1 from the memo of parties and the same was also allowed vide order dated 15th July, 2013 without prejudice to the contention of the counsel for the respondent No.4 of the consequence of such deletion. The counsel for the respondent No.4 states that though he was earlier appearing for the deceased respondent No.3 also but the legal heirs of the deceased respondent No.3 have not engaged him and he does not represent them.

(3.) None appears for the legal heirs of the respondent No.3; they are also proceeded against ex-parte.