JATINDER SARDANA Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioners praying inter alia for cancellation of a Conveyance Deed dated 12.8.2013 issued by the respondent No. 1/DDA in favour of the respondent No. 2. On the last date of hearing, counsel for the petitioners was asked to address the Court on the maintainability of the present petition as it was observed that disputed question of facts have been raised therein that cannot be determined in writ proceedings. Mr. Praveen Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioners had sought an adjournment to enable him to examine the said issue and seek instructions from his clients. At his request, the matter was adjourned for today.

(2.) Today, Mr. Sanjeev Sindhwani, Senior Advocate appears for the petitioners and states that he has instructions to argue the present petition which he states is very much maintainable.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel enters appearance for the respondent No. 2 states that the petitioners have withheld material information and deliberately failed to inform the court that much prior to filing the present petition, they along with Smt. Sushila Arora, their sister, had entered into an Agreement to Sell with one Mr. Murari Mirchandani in respect of the subject premises on 11.4.2012 for a total sale consideration of Rs. 14.25 lacs against which amount, they had received earnest money to the tune of Rs. 60.00 lacs. He hands over a set of documents, including copy of an Agreement to Sell dated 11.4.2012, executed by the petitioners in favour of one Mr. Murari Mirchandani in respect of the subject premises bearing No. S-94, Panchsheela Park, New Delhi. The documents handed over by the counsel for the respondent No. 2, with an advance copy to the other side, are taken on record.