MANJU DEVI Vs. PREMJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.M. Appl. No. 44438/2017 (for exemption)

(2.) The facts of the case pleaded by the respondent/plaintiff were that the appellant/defendant approached the respondent/plaintiff that the owner of a property bearing no. C-7/492 admeasuring 25 sq. yards, J.J. Colony, Sultanpuri, Delhi was in urgent need of the money and hence wanted to sell this property. Respondent/plaintiff was having good relation with the appellant/defendant and therefore respondent/plaintiff paid a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- to the appellant/defendant as a loan towards an investment for purchase of the property for a total price of Rs.7,40,000/-. The balance amount of Rs.1,40,000/- for purchase of the property was to be contributed by the appellant/defendant. It was agreed between the parties that when this property will be sold the profits thereof will be shared with 2/3rd share of the profits going to the respondent/plaintiff and 1/3rd share of the profits going to appellant/defendant. Appellant/defendant is also said to have executed a receipt dated 28.1.2008 Ex.PW1/1 in this regard. As the appellant/defendant sold the property but did not return the loan amount to the respondent/plaintiff nor paid the respondent/plaintiff the share of profits, therefore, the subject suit came to be filed for recovery of Rs.6,00,000/- paid by the respondent/plaintiff to the appellant/defendant.

(3.) Appellant/Defendant contested the suit and pleaded that no moneys were contributed by the respondent/plaintiff towards purchase of the subject property. Appellant/defendant claimed to have purchased the property by getting financial help from her family members. It was further pleaded by the appellant/defendant that the respondent/plaintiff had taken signatures of the appellant/defendant on blank papers for police verification as a tenant and therefore the receipt dated 28.1.2008 was pleaded to be forged and fabricated.