RAKA SINGHAL Vs. PUSHPA BUILDERS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, plaintiff in the suit entered into an Agreement dated 24th December, 1991 with the respondent, (defendant in the suit) for purchase of Flat No.B-02 on the second floor comprising super area of 935.70 sq.ft. in premises bearing No.13, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi, known as Pushpa Deep Apartments, for a total consideration of Rs.5,50,000/-. After making all the payments, possession of the flat was handed over to the appellant on 8th June, 1993. Aggrieved by the fact that despite making full payment, the respondent did not complete the works in the flat and it failed to execute the sale deed in favour of the appellant, as also by the fact that the respondent raised an inflated bill of Rs.4,54,840/- towards maintenance charges on the appellant, the appellant filed a suit for recovery of Rs.4,35,593/- and for specific performance and injunction. In its written statement, the respondent stated that the appellant had entered into a licence agreement with the respondent on 8th June, 1991. Reliance was placed on various clauses, including clauses 9, 28 and 34 of the said Agreement to contend that the appellant could not raise any claim with regard to the deficiency in the works in the flat after taking over the possession thereof and that the appellant was liable to share the proportionate costs of common services for which the respondent rightly raised a bill towards maintenance charges on her.

(2.) The trial court framed the following issues on 15th May, 2003:

(3.) After the issues were framed, the parties adduced their respective evidence.