RAISUDDIN Vs. MOHD. CHAMAN GULZAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) by the plaintiff in the suit impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 28.11.2017 by which the trial court has dismissed the suit for specific performance filed by the appellant/plaintiff. Suit however has been decreed for recovery of Rs.3 lacs paid by the appellant/plaintiff to the respondent/defendant under the agreement to sell dated 31.12.2010.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the parties entered into an agreement to sell dated 31.12.2010 for the property of the respondent/defendant bearing no.70, land measuring 50 sq. yards, part of Khasra No. 274/365, situated at Gali No. 39, Zakir Nagar, Jamia Nagar, Okhla, New Delhi-110025, as shown in the site plan (hereinafter referred to as the 'suit property'). The total sale consideration was of Rs.4.5 lacs of which appellant/plaintiff paid a sum of Rs.3 lacs for entering into an agreement to sell. Balance payment was to be made on or before 10.2.2011 at the time of execution of the sale documents and delivering possession of the suit property to the appellant/plaintiff. The case of the appellant/plaintiff was that the agreement to sell could not reach its conclusion of execution of the title documents in favour of the appellant/plaintiff because respondent/defendant on account of escalation of property prices in the area refused to execute the necessary title documents in favour of the appellant/plaintiff although the appellant/plaintiff is pleaded to have been always ready and willing to perform his part of contract for paying the balance sale consideration of Rs.1.5 lacs.

(3.) Respondent/defendant contested the suit and denied execution of the agreement to sell. It was pleaded that appellant/plaintiff is a money lender and respondent/defendant only had taken a loan of Rs.3 lacs for the purpose of the marriage of his daughter out of which a sum of Rs.1.5 lacs was also returned to the appellant/plaintiff. The title documents of the property were given to the appellant/plaintiff by the respondent/defendant as security. Suit was hence prayed to be dismissed.