KRISHNAKANT MANUPRASAD TRIVEDI Vs. URVASHIBEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, on 27.12.2017, rejecting the plaint of the plaintiff ?appellant in exercise of powers under Order 7, Rule 11 of Civil Procedure Code. Looking to the nature of disputes, we had decided to hear the appeal finally at the admission stage. Learned advocates for both the sides accordingly had made detailed submissions.

(2.) Brief facts are as under.

(3.) Appellant is original plaintiff. He had filed Civil Suit No.930 of 2017 seeking direction to the defendants to execute a registered sale deed of land bearing Final Plot No.147 of Town Planning Scheme No.3 of Mouje:Shekhpur ?Khanpur of Ahmedabad, admeasuring 2821 sq.mtrs. (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the suit land' for short) pursuant to the deed dated 13.03.1992. According to the plaintiff, the predecessor in title of the defendants i.e. one Chaitaniyabhai Patel had agreed to sale the suit land to the plaintiff orally on 15.01.1990 for a sale consideration of Rs. 32 lakhs. Between 15.01.1990 to 05.09.1991 on different dates, total consideration of Rs. 32 lakhs was paid to Chaitaniyabhai, for which, according to the plaintiff, he had also signed vouchers. On 13.03.1992, a deed was executed between the plaintiff and Chaitaniyabhai before the Executive Magistrate. This document is alternatively referred to as a sale deed or agreement to sell. We would refer to the contents of this documents later. According to the plaintiff, since Chaitaniyabhai was operating a hotel on the suit land and was in financial difficulties, he had promised to execute the sale deed later after some time. The plaintiff relied on such oral assurances. Further, it was also conveyed to the plaintiff that there are some disputes with the suit land going on. As soon as such disputes are resolved, the seller would obtain a title clearance certificate and execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. For several years thereafter, no developments took place with respect to this transaction. The plaintiff, according to the averments in the plaint, would request execution of a formal sale deed. Chaitaniyabhai would site some excuse or the other for delaying the same. Chaitaniyabhai expired on 25.01.2015. According to the plaintiff, shortly before filing the suit on 25.05.2017, he tried to meet the defendant no.1 at the suit site when he found some unknown persons' presence with police. The plaintiff thereupon learnt that the defendants had executed some writing in connection of the suit land in favour of the third party. He thereupon requested for execution of the sale deed. The defendants refused to do so, upon which, the said suit came to be filed.