RAJ RANI Vs. PRAFULLA KUMAR

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 30.08.2017 by which the trial court has decreed the suit for specific performance filed by the respondent/plaintiff with respect to property bearing no. BH-269, Shalimar Bagh (East), Delhi. Specific performance has been decreed by simultaneously directing payment of the balance sale consideration of Rs. 27,00,000/- to the appellant/defendant.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the respondent/plaintiff filed the subject suit for specific performance of the Agreement to Sell dated 07.09.2007 entered into between the appellant/defendant and the respondent/plaintiff with respect to the suit property. The total sale consideration was fixed at Rs. 33,01,000/-, of which Rs. 6,01,000/- was admittedly paid by the respondent/plaintiff at the time of entering into of the agreement to sell. The respondent/plaintiff claimed that the appellant/defendant could not get the property converted into freehold by 30.11.2007, and therefore time was extended first till 15.02.2008 and then till 29.03.2008 and finally till 30.04.2008. The respondent/plaintiff pleaded that the appellant/defendant then asked for a further sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- over the agreed sale consideration. Accordingly, the respondent/plaintiff sent a Legal Notice dated 08.04.2008 to the appellant/defendant to perform the contract, and on failure of the appellant/defendant to do the needful, the subject suit was filed.

(3.) Appellant/Defendant contested the suit by filing the written statement. Execution of the agreement to sell is admitted. The extension of time upto 15.02.2008 is admitted but thereafter the extensions are denied pleading that extensions till 29.03.2018 are forged endorsements. It was pleaded that the respondent/plaintiff was guilty of breach of contract. The suit was therefore prayed to be dismissed.