MUKESH KUMAR SINGH Vs. SATISH CHNADRA MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/defendant has assailed an order dated 01.10.2016, passed by the learned trial court dismissing his leave to defend application in a suit for recovery of Rs.1,40,00,000.00 instituted by the respondent/plaintiff against him along with pendente lite interest.

(2.) Holding that the appellant/defendant had not made out any defence to the suit and had concocted a false story to avoid payment of money to the respondent/plaintiff, the learned trial court dismissed the appellant's leave to defend application on the ground that no triable issue was raised by him.

(3.) The version of the respondent/plaintiff in the summary suit instituted by him under Order 37 Civil P.C. is that the appellant/defendant had approached him to purchase a plot of land measuring 128 square yards comprised in Khasra No. 20/13 situated in village Matyala, bearing No. 120-A, village Matyala known as Jain Colony Part-I, T-Block Extension, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi for a total sale consideration of Rs.1,10,00,000.00. After negotiations, the respondent/plaintiff agreed to purchase the subject land and the parties executed an Agreement to Sell dated 05.11.2010 wherein, it was recorded that the respondent/plaintiff had paid a sum of Rs.4 lacs to the appellant/defendant as part purchase price and the parties had agreed that the balance amount would be paid to the appellant/defendant at the time of executing the Sale/Conveyance Deed, for which the target date was fixed as 31.3.2011. Thereafter, the respondent/plaintiff made further payments to the appellant/defendant totalling to a sum of Rs.1,06,50,000.00, thus leaving the balance amount of Rs.3,50,000.00, to be paid to the appellant/defendant at the time of executing a Sale/Conveyance Deed.