SURENDER ARORA Vs. P N MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard parties' Counsel on the points of court fee and the question of the rejection of the plaint in its present form at length.

(2.) In this suit for declaration and injunction, the plaintiff seek the following reliefs:

(3.) The plaintiff claims that he is real estate agent and Mrs. Sumitra Chistion 15/10/1992 as trustee of M/s. Satazo trust applied to M/s. Inder Pratap singh HUF through plaintiff as an agent for allotment of the entire 11th floor approximately 8,000 sq ft. The builder agreed to sell entire 11th floor to M/s. satazo Trust at the rate of Rs.3,850.00 per sq. ft. An agreement to sell by Mr. Inder Pratap Singh on behalf of M/s. Inder paratap Singh HUF was signed in favour of Mrs. Sumitra Chisti. An allotment letter was also issued. Both these documents were witnessed by the plaintiff. On 18/12/1992 an appropriate authority under Section 269-UC of Income Tax Act by its order dated 18/12/1992 issued no objection to the transfer for a sum of Rs. 3,08,00,000.00. On March 13,1994 an agreement to sell was executed between M/s. Satazo Trust through Mrs. Sumitra Chisti and the plaintiff as the purchaser for a sum of Rs. 4,84,00,000.00 through two cheques dated 13/3/1994. No Objection Certificate was sought again from the appropriate authority under section 269-UC of Income Tax Act. On 18/5/1994 Appropriate Authority issued No Objection to the transfer. Accordingly sale transaction was to be completed within a period of six months by execution of the transfer deeds in favour of the plaintiff or his nominees. The prices shot up. The defendants published advertisement on July 15,1994 and one H.S. Sandhu visited the office of the plaintiff asking him to execute a cancellation deed and the notice dated 18/7/1994 was also received. As the cloud has been cast on the right of the plaintiff on the agreement to sell dated 13/3/1994 the suit for declaration for permanent injunction has been filed.