SATISH KUMAR Vs. DIMPLE KUMARI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAYER in CM. No. 14898 C of 2014 is for condonation of delay of 104 days in filing the appeal.

(2.) THE reasons assigned for not filing the appeal in time is that he was arranging for the money to affix the Court fee. Apart from this, the communication gap between the counsel and the appellant has also been taken as a ground for delay in filing the appeal.

(3.) I have heard the counsel for the appellant on the merits of the case as well, where a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 11.05.2004 in respect of House No. 5760 -B, Sector 38 (West), Chandigarh, is sought to be enforced, according to which an earnest money of Rs. 2,00,000/ - was paid to defendant -respondent No. 2, Sanjeev Kumar, who is a general power of attorney holder of defendant -respondent No. 1, Dimple Kumari, who is his sister. The total sale consideration was fixed as Rs. 21,30,000/ - and the date for execution of the sale deed was fixed as 09.08.2004. The said suit stands dismissed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chandigarh on 19.02.2013, against which an appeal preferred by the appellant -plaintiff has been partly allowed by the District Judge, Chandigarh on 10.02.2014, entitling him to refund a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/ - (earnest money) paid by him to the respondent -defendants alongwith 12% interest per annum from the date of execution of the agreement to sell dated 11.05.2004 till the date of actual payment.