GURDIP KAUR Vs. KAMLESH SACHDEVA & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

(2.) This appeal impugns the order of the court below dated 28.10.2013 which has dismissed the application filed by the appellant under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. Appellant Ms. Nirmala Kaur was the applicant in the application and she was the daughter of defendant no.2 against whom the exparte decree for specific performance was passed on 5.12.1997.

(3.) The facts of the case are that the original defendant no.1-Sh. Govind Jindani was the owner of the suit property, however, he transferred rights in the suit property by means of documentation dated 15.3.1980 to the defendant no.2, and who was the father of the applicant. Therefore, after the transfer of rights in the suit property, the defendant no.1 had no interest left in the suit property. In terms of the aforesaid documentation since defendant no.2 had acquired rights in the suit property which is plot bearing no.1, Block-C, Community Centre, Nimri Colony, Delhi situated on a plot of 50.16 sq. mts, the same was agreed to be sold by him (defendant no.2) to the plaintiff in the suit vide Agreement to Sell dated 19.6.1982 and a total amount of Rs.35,000/- out of the total sale consideration of Rs.1,07,500/- was received. On failure of the defendant no.2 to specifically perform the contract the subject suit for specific performance came to be filed in the year 1983.