HEMRAJ HOSPITAL LIMITED Vs. VARUN VASUDEVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M/s. Hemraj Hospitals Ltd. as plaintiff filed the instant suit for specific performance against defendant Sh. Varun Vasudeva on the basis of Agreement to Sell dated 14th August 1994 as per which, defendant agreed to sell his property bearing No.C-203, Greater Kailash Part I, New Delhi, to the plaintiff company for a consideration of Rs.43 lakhs. Mrs. Meera Ahuja was the Managing Director of the plaintiff company at that time. First floor portion of the property was already under the tenancy of Ms. Meera Ahuja at the time of entering into the aforesaid Agreement to Sell. Other portions were under the tenancy of some other tenants. During the pendency of this suit application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (IA No. 6999/2002) was filed by Sh. Vinod Vasudeva and Smt. Veena Kumar stating that they were the legal owners of the said property as the property was in the name of Sh. Jagdish N. Vasudeva and on his death it was inherited by them. It was also stated that the defendant Varun Vasudeva had entered into Agreement to Sell dated 14th August 1994 with the plaintiff and the applicants had entered into settlement with the plaintiff whereby they had agreed to execute the sale deed in respect of this property in favour of the plaintiff to honour the said Agreement to Sell entered into by Sh. Varun Vasudeva. They were allowed to be impleaded as parties. The Court also passed decree dated 9th August 2002 in terms of settlement between the parties on application (IA No. 6998/2002) filed by the parties under Order 23 Rules 1.and 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, inter alia, directing that in view of settlement of the parties and also the facts disclosed in the application, decree in terms of tripartite agreement dated 3rd July 2002 be passed. As per this agreement, sale deed is executed in favour of the plaintiff. Thus, plaintiff s suit is decreed. There may not be any quarrel up to this stage as the plaintiff got the relief which it wanted.

(2.) However, what is significant is that on behalf of the plaintiff company, the agreement was entered into by Sh. Ashok Kumar.Pahuja stating to be Managing Director of the company. According to him, he had purchased the shares of the company held by Mrs. Meera Ahuja etc.

(3.) Present application is filed by Mrs. Meera Ahuja for setting aside this decree, inter alia, alleging that sometime in March 1994 she met with serious accident and was confined to bed for almost a year. As she could not arrange for funds to pay the balance purchase price in respect of the suit property, she entered into an agreement with Mr. Ashok Kumar Pahuja for transfer of entire shareholding in the company with its assets and liabliities to said Ashok Kumar Pahuja for a sum of Rs.95 lakhs out of which a sum of Rs.27 lakhs was to be paid to the defendant. A sum of Rs.16 lakhs was paid by Sh. Ashok Kumar Pahuja at the time of the agreement and aforesaid Rs.27 lakhs was to be paid after receiving consideration of Rs.95 lakhs. It is alleged that Sh. Ashok Kumar Pahuja did not pay the balance consideration in respect of shares nor he ever came to retrieve the shares from Mrs. Meera Ahuja which is still in her possession. However, he entered into a criminal conspiracy with Dr. Naresh jain, another Director of the plaintiff company and forged and fabricated the shares of the Directors held in the plaintiff company and on the basis of said shares he alleged that he had acquired the entire shareholding of the plaintiff company and had become the Managing Director of the company and on this basis he entered into agreement with the defendant and filed application under Order 23 Rules 1 and 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. According to Mrs. Meera Ahuja, at no time any single share of the company had been transferred in favour of Sh. Ashok Kumar Pahuja. Therefore, it is alleged that Dr. Naresh Jain as well as Sh. Ashok Kumar Pahuja had not only played fraud oh the plaintiff company but on the court as well and in these circumstances, it is prayed that decree be set aside as nullity and suit restored to its original position. It may be mentioned that Mrs. Meera Ahuja also lodged FIR against Dr. Naresh Jain and Sh. Ashok Kumar Pahuja with the Police Station Greater Kailash, New Delhi being FIR No. 233/2001 dated 24th August 2001. Therefore, when the arguments were heard in this case it was deemed proper that record of the said FIR, which is pending in the Court of Sh. B.K. Garg, Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, be summoned. It became necessary as police has investigated into the same allegations made by Mrs. Meera Ahuja and it was informed that police had completed the investigation and filed challan before the Court. This record was received only in the last week of December 2005. On going through the record it transpires that after receiving the investigation report/challan learned Metropolitan Magistrate has yet to take cognizance of this report. The case was lastly fixed before the Metropolitan Magistrate on 14th December 2005 when complainant sought time to go through the charge-sheet filed by the I.O.