MOHAMMAD AMIN KUCHAY Vs. MUKHTAR AHMAD THOKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner through the medium of present petition has challenged order dtd. 15/5/2025, whereby plaint filed by him has been returned to him for its presentation before the Commercial Court.

(2.) It appears that the petitioner/plaintiff has filed a civil suit under Order 37 Rule 1 of CPC seeking recovery of amount of Rs.64.00 lacs alongwith interest etc. from the respondents/defendants. In the said suit, it has been pleaded by the plaintiff that in the year 2021, he had approached the defendants for purchase of land measuring 100 kanals, situated at Gund Ali Nayak, Tehsil Khansahib, District Budgam with a view to make investment of his money as the petitioner/plaintiff is a businessman. Accordingly, an agreement to sell dtd. 21/8/2021, was executed between the petitioner/plaintiff and the respondents/defendants, whereby the respondents/defendants agreed to sell the suit land for an amount of Rs.2.21crores. It has been pleaded by the petitioner that the respondents/defendants have already received Rs.60.00 lacs as earnest money and the balance sale amount was agreed to be paid to the respondents in installments from September, 2021 to January, 2022. It has been further submitted that the respondents/defendants agreed to deliver possession of the suit land in the month of September, 2021 and that the respondents received two more installments of Rs.30.00 lacs in the month of September/October, 2021.According to the petitioner/plaintiff he made a further payment of Rs.67.00 lacs to the respondents up to 25/11/2021. Thus, according to the petitioner/plaintiff Rs.1.27crore has been paid by him to the respondents/defendants from 6/8/2021 to 25/11/2021, but delivery of possession of the land in question was not made in his favour in terms of the covenants of agreement to sell.

(3.) The petitioner/plaintiff is stated to have entered into deliberations and discussions with the respondents/defendants and it was agreed that instead of refunding double the amount received by the defendants, only an amount of Rs.1.74 crore shall be refunded by the defendants to the plaintiff. It has been pleaded that the defendants returned only 1.10 crore to the plaintiff but have refused to pay remaining amount of Rs.64.00 lacs. Ultimately defendant No.1 is stated to have issued two cheques dtd. 19/9/2022 and 22/9/2022 in favour of the plaintiff amounting to Rs.5.00 lacs each. However, the said cheques were dishonoured and proceedings under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act were initiated against the drawer of the cheques. It has been contended by the plaintiff that the defendants are liable to pay an amount of Rs.64.00 lacs to him and now they have categorically refused to liquidate the said amount.