TARDEO PROPERTIES PVT LTD Vs. BANK OF BARODA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises from the judgment dated 20-12-1996 passed in Suit No.1567 of 1987. By the impugned judgment, the suit has been sought to be decreed purportedly in exercise of powers under Order 8, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, hereinafter called as "the CPC".

(2.) The respondents/plaintiffs filed suit for specific performance of the agreements dated 10-8-1984. Under the said agreements, the plaintiffs had agreed to purchase 20 flats and 10 car parking spaces in the building known as "Shirin Apartments" stated to have been constructed by the appellants/defendants in the property at Tardeo Road, Mumbai. It is the case of the plaintiffs that all the said agreements were registered under the provisions of law and the plaintiffs had paid to the defendants from time to time a total sum of Rs.1,32,00,000/- towards the purchase price of the said flats and the parking spaces, besides, Rs.1,01,500/- for the registration charges and Rs.50,000/- towards the other legal charges. It is further case of the plaintiffs that the defendants were bound to obtain certificate from the concerned authorities and handover the possession of the premises. It is further case of the plaintiffs that the defendants sought extension from time to time on one pretext or the other but failed to keep their promise and as there was valid and subsisting agreements for sale of the flats and the parking spaces and since the plaintiffs were entitled for specific performance, the suit had to be filed.

(3.) When the matter came up for hearing before the trial Court on 20-12-1996, only the plaintiffs Advocate appeared. As far as the defendants were concerned, neither they were present nor was any Advocate on their behalf. The Court recording that the defendants were duly served with the writ of summons, that they were represented by the Advocate from time to time, and that they had failed to file the written statement, the plaintiffs were held to be entitled for judgment and decree under Order 8, Rule 10 of the CPC, and accordingly the suit was decreed as above.