MADHU Vs. RANBIR SINGH DABAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order dated 2nd September, 2014 whereby the application of the respondent No.1 under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was allowed the petitioner prefers the present petition.

(2.) A suit was filed by respondent No.1 Ranbir Singh Dabas against the petitioner Smt. Madhu and Vice Chairman, DDA seeking specific performance of the agreement and permanent injunction against Smt. Madhu. It was stated that in the year 1985 Land and Building Department acquired the land of Shri Vijay Singh admeasuring 24 bighas situated at Rithala, Delhi vide award dated 10th September, 1985 and also recommended for allotment of an alternative plot. Vijay Singh, husband of Smt. Madhu passed away on 19th July, 2007. During his life time Vijay Singh represented to Ranbir Singh to be the prospective owner of the plot admeasuring 332.5 sq.mtr. allotted to him by virtue of a recommendation letter and that he was interested to sell the said plot. Ranbir Singh agreed to purchase the said plot on a premium of Rs. 3,58,000/ - and paid the said premium to late Vijay Singh in cash. An agreement to sell/Bayana receipt was executed between Ranbir Singh and Vijay Singh on 31st March, 2001. At that time Smt. Madhu also executed a separate receipt acknowledging receipt of Rs. 3,58,000/ - as sale consideration for the plot. General power of attorney and special power of attorney were executed in the name of Ranbir Singh and all original documents were delivered to him. It was also assured by Vijay Singh and Madhu that they would cooperate with Ranbir Singh in future and hand -over all the documents of DDA from time to time. On the allotment of plot vide letter dated 24th March, 2008 Ranbir Singh approached Smt. Madhu as Vijay Singh had expired by that time and asked her to complete the formalities. Though Smt. Madhu performed some formalities like execution of the relinquishment deed, depositing the same in DDA etc., however thereafter she refused to perform the subsequent formalities. Ranbir Singh also deposited a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/ - and Rs. 11 lakhs with DDA through demand draft.

(3.) VIDE the amendment application Ranbir Singh stated that while going through the original file it was revealed that after allotment of the plot Madhu had acknowledged the execution of the earlier agreement and also undertook to complete the necessary formalities. Since this fact was not brought to the notice of the counsel by Ranbir Singh and has now come to the knowledge of counsel, thus an amendment was sought in Paras 10 and 24 of the plaint.