SARDAR NIRMALJEET SINGH Vs. SMT. ANUPAMA MOTWANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant in the suit impugning the judgment of the Trial Court dated 17.4.2017, by which the trial court has decreed the suit for specific performance filed by the respondent/plaintiff with respect to ? ..?th share in the suit property bearing no.17/6, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi.

(2.) At the outset, it is required to be stated that scope of hearing of this appeal is limited because the appellant/defendant in spite of service failed to appear and contest the suit. Appellant/defendant was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 29.7.2009. Appellant/defendant thereafter moved an application under Order IX Rule 7 CPC, but the same was also dismissed. There is therefore neither any written statement of the appellant/defendant in the trial court nor was any evidence led on behalf of the appellant/defendant. Appellant/defendant has not even cared to cross-examine the PW-1/respondent/plaintiff.

(3.) The subject suit for specific performance was filed by the respondent/plaintiff pleading that parties entered into an agreement to sell dated 25.5.2005 whereby respondent/plaintiff agreed to purchase from the appellant/defendant the latter's ? ..?th undivided share in the property bearing no.17/6, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi for a total sale consideration of Rs. 38.22 lacs. Respondent/plaintiff pleaded to have initially paid a sum of Rs. 2 lacs and thereafter a sum of Rs. 5 lacs in cash. Balance payment was to be made within 15 days of converting the property from leasehold to freehold. Respondent/plaintiff also pleaded that she had already purchased the remaining share of the suit property from other co-owners except ?th share owned by Sardar Guljeet Singh and with respect to which share also respondent/plaintiff pleads to have in her favour an agreement to sell. Respondent/plaintiff pleaded that since 2008, the appellant/defendant in spite of requests was not getting converted the property into freehold and therefore after serving the legal notice dated 18.6.2008 the subject suit was filed.