KAMLA KUMAR Vs. KAMLESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is filed under Section 100 CPC against the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 11.7.2013 and the first appellate court dated 22.11.2013; by which the suit for specific performance and possession filed by the appellant -plaintiff with respect to the agreement to sell dated 28.9.2000 pertaining to the property bearing plot nos.36 and 37 admeasuring 300 sq. yds forming part of K.No.54/29, village Mitraon, Delhi, now known as Gopal Nagar, C -Block, Najafgarh, New Delhi -43, has been dismissed.

(2.) RIGHT at the outset I must state that the impugned judgments of both the courts below are very surprising by which the suit for specific performance has been dismissed, inasmuch as, out of the three co -owners/three defendants, the defendant no.1 filed his written statement admitting to the transaction laying blame at the door of the defendant nos.2 and 3 for not completing the transaction; thereafter did not appear and was proceeded ex parte, and the defendant nos. 2 and 3 did not file their written statement and ultimately their right to file written statement was closed. There is hence no evidence led on behalf of the respondents/defendants. It may be stated that the order passed for closing the right of the defendant nos. 2 and 3/respondent nos. 2 and 3 was challenged by them in the High Court and this Court in CM (M) No. 824/2007 by the order dated 5.9.2008 confirmed the order closing the right of the respondent nos. 2 and 3/defendant nos. 2 and 3 to file their written statement.

(3.) THE courts below have dismissed the suit for specific performance by holding that the suit is barred by limitation and that in the agreement to sell it is not mentioned that the sale deed will be executed. Both these reasons are not only illegal but perverse to say the least.