GUR PARSAD CHADHA Vs. NARENDER PAL MALIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against a judgment dated 13.8.2001 passed in a suit for specific performance and permanent injunction instituted by the appellants (plaintiffs in the court below), against the respondent (defendant in the court below) praying inter alia for directions to the respondent/defendant to perform his obligations under the Agreement dated 24.1.1989 and execute a sale deed in respect of a shop situated on the ground floor of a premises bearing No. I-C/125, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the shop'), after getting the same converted into freehold. The appellants/plaintiffs also sought a decree of permanent injunction against the respondent/defendant restraining him from disturbing the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the appellants/plaintiffs in respect of the shop and from selling, transferring or alienating the said shops.

(2.) A brief backdrop of the case, as set out by the appellants/plaintiffs in the plaint is that in January 1989, they were on look out for a commercial shop to run their business activity of providing Crane Services and sale of car accessories. The appellants/plaintiffs came to know that the respondent/defendant was offering to sell commercial shops on the ground floor of the suit premises. A site plan of the said shop marked in red was enclosed with the plaint. The appellants/plaintiffs averred that the sale price of the shop was finalized at Rs. 1,25,000/-. It is the case of the appellants that as the property in question was a leasehold property, the respondent/defendant could not execute an outright sale deed, and therefore the parties decided to execute an Agreement to Sell-cum-Lease Deed. The said document entitled a "Lease Deed", was executed on 24.1.1989. The appellants/plaintiffs stated that they had paid a major portion of the sale consideration to the respondent/defendant, amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/- and that he agreed to get the property converted into freehold as and when it was permissible and to execute a sale deed in favour of the appellants/plaintiffs upon receipt of the balance sum of Rs. 25,000/-. In the meantime, it was agreed that the appellants/plaintiffs would pay a sum of Rs. 600/- per month to the respondent/defendant as notional lease rent for occupying the premises.

(3.) The appellants/plaintiffs claimed that they remained in peaceful and continuous possession of the shop since 21.1.1989 and conducted their business from the said shop. They also tendered a sum of Rs. 600/- per month to the respondent/defendant on a monthly basis, in terms of the agreement, till July, 1993. In the meantime, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi passed an attachment order dated 30.6.1993 in view of outstanding property tax pertaining to the premises and attached the lease rent being paid by the appellants/plaintiffs to the respondent/defendant. As a result, from August 1993 onwards, the appellants/plaintiffs started depositing the said amount on a monthly basis with the MCD.