SUNITA DEVI AND ORS. Vs. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1 of C.P.C. is directed against the order dated 11.09.2014 passed in Civil Suit No. 8A/2014 ED.

(2.) THE facts necessary for adjudication of this matter are that the respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance and permanent injunction. This suit is based on agreement dated 14.01.2014. As per this agreement, Rs. 10,00,000/ - were already paid out of total sale consideration i.e. 1,27,68,000/ -. As per agreement, the last date for sale was 30.06.2014. The plaintiff filed a suit and took objection that defendants No. 3 & 4 are minor. In absence of permission from the court of competent jurisdiction, the sale cannot take place on behalf of minors. Another objection taken was that Raman Kishore Goyal and Nand Kishore Agrawal have claimed some right on the suit property. Hence, in absence of consent from those persons, sale deed cannot be executed. Thus in the plaint, it is prayed that the defendant be directed to execute the sale deed after obtaining the remaining amount from the plaintiff. The defendant be directed that before execution of sale deed they should resolve the dispute with Raman Kishore Goyal and Nand Kishore Agrawal, obtain their consent and then obtain permission from the court. Relief clause also contains the relief regarding permission of sale of property in relation to the said minors.

(3.) SHRI Sharma further submits that the time for executing the sale deed was up to 30.06.2014. However, appellant gave willingness before the court below to continue it provided complete sale consideration is paid. The plaintiff has raised flimsy objections in order to avoid the sale deed. He has not paid the sale consideration and in fact does not have money for the same. His entire device is to delay the proceedings in order to arrange money, save interest and harass the present appellant. Reliance is place on medical documents Annexure B wherein it is mentioned that the appellant is suffering from serious ailments. Shri Sharma submits that appellant is suffering from cancer and is in a bad state of health.