MEENAKSHI Vs. ABNASH CHANDER MAHAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants have filed the instant appeal being dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated June 4, 2004 passed by lower Appellate Court, Chandigarh whereby the suit for possession by way of ejectment and recovery of mesne profits was decreed. The facts relevant for deciding the present appeal are that a civil suit titled as Sh. Abnash Chancier Mahajan and others v. Sh. Ravi Kumar Kalia and others, bearing Civil Suit No. 289/January 11, 1989 was preferred by Shri Abnash Chander Mahajan and others plaintiffs (respondents herein) for ejectment of the defendants (appellants herein) from ground floor and IInd floor of SCO No. 360, Sector 32-D, Chandigarh as well as suit for recovery of damages/ mesne profits submitting therein that the defendants (appellants herein) are tenants on the ground floor and IInd floor of SCO No. 360, Sector 32-D, Chandigarh on a monthly rent of Rs. 5930/-. It was further submitted that since the defendants could not prove to be the good tenant, the plaintiffs had terminated the tenancy by issuing the notices dated October 5, 1988 and October 6, 1988 calling upon the defendants to vacate the said premises and deliver its vacant possession to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs also claimed damages and mesne profits. Since the defendants did not vacate the premises and did not bother about the aforesaid notices, the plaintiffs were left with no option except to file the suit for ejectment and recovery.

(2.) Upon notice; the defendants-appellants filed their written statement submitting therein that plaintiffs-respondents agreed to sell the whole of this property to them for a consideration of Rs. 11,00,000/-. In this regard, an agreement to sell was executed on July 6, 1989. The defendants-appellants paid a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the plaintiffs-respondents as earnest money vide bank draft No. 663772 dated July 5, 1989. Before executing the sale deed in terms of the above agreement, the plaintiffs-respondents were required to obtain no objection certificate from the Estate Office, Chandigarh and income tax clearance certificate from the Income Tax Authority. The sale deed was to be executed in favour of the defendants-appellants within fifteen days from the date of completion of the above formalities. The respondents-plaintiffs failed to deposit the instalments pertaining to this building with the Estate Office. As such, Estate office issued a notice to the respondents-plaintiffs for resuming this building for non-payment of that amount. However, in pursuance to the agreement, the defendants-appellants deposited a sum of Rs. 1,24,641/- on 26.10.1989, Rs. 1,00,000/- on 9.1.1990, Rs. 25,000/- on 17.5.1994 and Rs. 20,000/- on 4.10.1994 in the Estate Office. It was alleged that this amount was carrying interest @ 24% per annum which was to be adjusted towards rent. It was further alleged that though the defendants-appellants were ready and willing to perform their part of the contract in terms of the agreement but the respondents-plaintiffs neither obtained no objection certificate from the Estate Office nor did they obtain income tax clearance certificate from the Income Tax Authority. They kept on delaying the matter on one pretext or the other. Therefore, respondents-plaintiffs have no locus standi to seek their ejectment from the demised premises.

(3.) While appreciating the evidence available on record, the said suit was dismissed with costs vide judgment and decree dated June 15, 1999 by the trial Court.