HARMOHINDER SINGH VIRK Vs. RAHUL ARORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The undisputed background that is well enunciated in the submissions of the counsel for the two sides and is also clearly reflected from the records of the Courts is that defendant No. 1 Rahul Arora has inherited the estate from his grand parents besides other properties including the house in question situated in the city of Chandigarh.

(2.) While defendant No. 1 was residing abroad his father defendant No. 2 Tilak Raj Arora being his attorney entered into an agreement to sell dtd. 31/3/2021 for the sale of this house with the plaintiff. The terms and conditions of which agreement to sell are not at all displaced or disputed. It is in pursuance of the same, amounts detailed in the pleadings have been received on behalf of the owners either in cash or by way of bank transactions. In all, a sum of Rs.4.00 lacs stands paid to the seller by the buyer out of total sum of Rs.35.00 lacs. One of the terms of the sale was that owner shall obtain 'No Objection Certificate' from the estate officer, Chandigarh/Income tax clearance certificate from the Income Tax Department.

(3.) When the deal could not be completed, the plaintiff served upon defendants legal notice dtd. 21/6/2004 and, thereafter, the present suit was filed by the plaintiff seeking a decree by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell dtd. 31/3/2011 and in the alternate sought relief for the recovery of Rs.35.00 lacs as damages.