MARYAM BEE Vs. SHUIBHAM JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this Appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as "CPC"] read with Sec. 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966 [hereinafter referred to as "DHC Act"], the Appellant assails the correctness of the Order dtd. 7/5/2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A. No. 23592/2023 in C.S. (Comm) No. 590/2023 titled Shuibham Jain and Ors. vs. Maryam Bee, wherein the application, under Order I, Rule 10 of the CPC, 1908, filed by Respondent No.4, was allowed and he was impleaded in the underlying suit as a party and arrayed as Defendant No.2.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the present Appeal are that Respondent Nos.1 to 3 (Plaintiffs before the Court of first instance) filed a suit seeking, inter alia, specific performance of an Agreement to Sell dtd. 27/12/2022 [hereinafter referred to as "ATS"], allegedly executed between the Appellant and Respondent Nos. 1 to 3, for the sale of the property admeasuring 82.5 Sq. Yards, bearing Municipal No. 1806 (Mezzanine Floor to Second Floor with roof rights), Ward No. 4, Chandni Chowk, Dariba Kalan, New Delhi, 110006 [hereinafter referred to as "suit property"].

(3.) It is the case of the Original Plaintiffs that the Appellant and Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 entered into the ATS for sale of suit property for a total consideration of Rs.7,00,00,000.00 (Rupees Seven Crores Only); however, despite having made partial payment, the Appellant has failed to have the sale deed executed in their favour, which compelled Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to file a suit against the Appellant. The Appellant contended that the total sale consideration was Rs.9,00,00,000.00 (Rupees Nine Crores Only), as another ATS of Rs.2,00,00,000.00 (Rupees Two Crores Only) was executed on 27/12/2022, but since Respondents 1 to 3 failed to pay, the Appellant could not execute the sale deed.