KISHORE VERMA Vs. VINOD BIHARI SINHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has filed a suit for specific performance against the defendants in respect of plot of land measuring 104 sq meters with a constructed house thereon bearing no. C-496, Vikas Puri, New Delhi ? 110018. The plaintiff claims that the receipt (ExPW1/1) was signed which settled the sale consideration for sale of the said house at Rs 38,15,000/- against which Rs 50,000/- was paid leaving a balance of Rs 37,65,000/-. A further sum of Rs 1,00,000/- was paid thereafter as is written on the back of that receipt and that portion of the document is ExPW1/3.

(2.) The plaintiff claims that in terms of ExPW1/1, the balance had to be paid at the stage of completion of registration of sale deed, but on 22.10.2003 the defendants approached the plaintiff for a further advance of Rs 1,00,000/-. The stand of the plaintiff is that though this was not required to be paid, in view of the personal needs expressed by the defendants this amount was so paid as is recorded in ExPW1/3. The plaintiff claims to have requested the defendants a number of times to execute the sale deed but to no effect and thus ultimately a legal notice was sent on 02.05.2005 through counsel. The receipt of the notice was refused. Thus, the suit has been filed. Along with the suit, the site plan has been filed as Annexure A (ExPW1/2).

(3.) The summons in the suit and notice on the interim application were issued on 17.04.2006 and interim orders were also granted in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff was directed to deposit the balance amount in court. There was, however, some delay in the deposit of the amount and thus an application was filed by the plaintiff which came up on 18.05.2006 on which date the counsel for the plaintiff stated that the draft of Rs 15,00,000/- was ready and the balance amount would be deposited. This application was allowed on the same date and thereafter the plaintiff has made deposit of Rs 36,65,000/-. The defendants entered appearance through counsel on 27.07.2006 and as prayed for were granted 30 days time to file the written statement. A further schedule was laid down but thereafter the defendants stopped appearing. The written statement stated to have been filed by the defendants was lying under objections. The defendants were finally proceeded ex parte on 27.02.2007.