RAKESH CHHABRA Vs. ANSUL ARYA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the parties submit that the record of CS(OS) No. 411/2013 as is necessary for the effective adjudication of the present appeal has been filed by the appellant. We have been carefully taken through the record and perused the impugned judgment dated 21st July, 2014 passed by the learned Single Judge. Learned senior counsel for the appellant and learned counsels for the respondents have been heard at length.

(2.) RESPONDENT no. 1 Anshul Arya (as plaintiff) had originally filed suit bearing CS(OS) No. 411/2013 against defendant no. 1 Rakesh Chhabra (appellant herein) and defendant no. 2 Mohinder Kumar (respondent no. 2 herein), who was the owner of Flat No. 42, 3rd Floor, Antariksha Apartment, Vikas Puri, New Delhi -110018. It appears that Rakesh Chhabra (the appellant herein), who was a tenant in the property and had been earlier claiming under agreement to sell with Mohinder Kumar, unsuccessfully filed a suit for specific performance. The suit by Rakesh Chhabra as on date stands dismissed on the finding that the appellant was unable to establish readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract. The appeal against the dismissal of the suit happens to be pending in this court. We are informed by learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 herein that interim stay in the appeal has been declined to the appellant herein for the reason that he is claiming under an unregistered agreement to sell. Be that as it may, for the purposes of adjudication of the present appeal, it is not necessary for us to deliberate on this litigation between Rakesh Chhabra and Mohinder Kumar, the recorded owner of Flat No. 42, 3rd Floor, Antariksha Apartment, Vikas Puri, New Delhi -110018 any further.

(3.) IT appears that despite service, Rakesh Chhabra (appellant herein) failed to file written statement in accordance with law and his right to do so was closed on 30th May, 2014. For the reason that no further steps were taken by Rakesh Chhabra as well as the fact that Mohinder Kumar admitted the plaintiff's case, the court proceeded to judgment on the 21st of July 2014 and decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff (respondent no. 1 herein) against the present appellant in terms of the prayers.