LAWS(BOM)-2013-10-127

RUPJI CONSTRUCTIONS Vs. BHARATI SANTOSH LABDE

Decided On October 22, 2013
Rupji Constructions Appellant
V/S
Bharati Santosh Labde Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All Appeals filed by the original Defendants as the learned Judge, by separate orders dated 16 April 2013 in respective motions and suits filed by Plaintiffs-Respondents, granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (c),which are reproduced below:

(2.) The submission is made by the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant that he is mainly aggrieved by grant of prayer clause (c)as that resulted into halting the project in all respect, as no further modification in the plan and/or proposed construction can be made of the flats to be constructed at Rupji Skyline, 184-A, N.M. Joshi Marg, Lower Parel bearing C.S. No.205. There is no serious dispute with respect to the Plaintiffs contract/agreement in the year 2006. They were made known that the development of the property/proposal is in joint venture with Maharashtra Housing And Area Development Authority (MHADA). It is also made known that the proposal is sent to MHADA for their approval, therefore, sanction/permission is necessary to develop the respective flats/society. The Plaintiffs knowing this, agreed to purchase the respective flats and paid the consideration. The subsequent amount as asked at later stage was also paid. Lastly, the demand of Rs.4,000/- each made by the Appellant, it was objected/resisted by the Plaintiffs, as even by that time there was no substantial progress made to develop the property though amount received by the Appellant.

(3.) The Plaintiffs-Respondents, therefore, in this background filed respective suits for a decree of specific performance of sale in the proposed project in question. The prayers are also made to enter into regular agreement for sale. The prayers is also made to set aside letter dated 27 August 2012 whereby the Appellant threaten to cancel the agreement and to sell the flats in open market. The submission is also made by referring to the documents on record by the learned Counsel appearing for the Plaintiffs-Respondents that the Appellant (Builder) is still advertising and booking/selling the salable flats.