HAJI ZAFRUDDIN Vs. FIROZUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order of the ADJ-07 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, dated 07.03.2019 in Suit No.54/2016, whereby the Trial Court has directed the appointment of a Local Commissioner to execute a sale deed in respect of the suit property. Facts

(2.) The suit arises out of an Agreement to Sell dated 07.01.2016 between the petitioner/defendant and the respondent/plaintiff. The plaintiff sued the respondent for specific performance of the said agreement. Pursuant to submissions of the parties held in various orders, the Trial Court by the impugned order recorded that the defendant has failed to execute the sale deed despite having undertaken before the Court to do so, and consequently appointed a Local Commissioner to execute the sale deed on behalf of the defendant. The sale deed has since been executed by the Local Commissioner in favour of the plaintiff.

(3.) The principal grievance of the petitioner in these proceedings is that the Trial Court has virtually executed the order of specific performance even in the absence of a decree. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the agreement to sell expressly indicated that the defendant wished to construct an additional floor on the suit premises, and stipulated that the plaintiff would permit the defendant to erect four pillars in the suit property to enable such construction on the first floor. The suit property is admittedly a shop on the ground floor of the premises in question. It has been submitted that the plaintiff did not cooperate in the construction sought to be raised and has, after the execution of the sale deed pursuant to the impugned order, in fact filed a suit against the defendant for an injunction restraining the defendant from raising the construction.