Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Rajesh Kumar vs Moin Ahmad on 17 May, 2023

                                    $~3.
                                    *           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                    +           RFA 346/2023
                                                RAJESH KUMAR                                                                    ..... Appellant
                                                                                      Through:                 Mr. Shafiq Khan, Advocate.

                                                                                      versus

                                                MOIN AHMAD                                                                      ..... Respondent
                                                                                      Through:

                                                CORAM:
                                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH
                                                                                      ORDER

% 17.05.2023 The hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode (physical and virtual hearing).

The present application has been filed by the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 15 days in re-filing the present appeal.

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Delay of 15 days in re-filing the present appeal is condoned.

The application stands disposed of.

1. By way of the present appeal, the appellant (original defendant) is challenging the judgment and decree dated 31.01.2023 passed by learned Additional District Judge-01, Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in CS No. 18336/16 titled as 'Sh. Moin Ahmed v. Sh. Rajesh Kumar'.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 12:15:36

2. Learned Trial Court, vide the impugned judgment, was pleased to decree the suit for recovery filed by the respondent (original plaintiff) against the appellant.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is the owner of the property/shop bearing no. 2733 (part) area 10 x l2 feet, situated at Sadar Thana Road, Sadar Bazar, Delhi-110006 (hereinafter referred to as 'suit property'). The appellant entered into a written Bayana Iqrarnama (Agreement to Sell) dated 22.02.2013 with the respondent for the sale of the suit property. The total sale consideration agreed between the parties was Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lacs only), out of which Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lacs only) was paid as bayana money and the balance sale consideration was to be paid by 21.05.2013, the date of execution of sale deed. The time period for execution of the sale deed was extended till 20.06.2013 and the respondent paid Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lacs only) on 05.03.2013 and further Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lacs only) on 02.05.2013 as part of the sale consideration. It is the case of the respondent that the sale deed could not be executed on 20.06.2013 as the appellant was not in town and had sought further extension of time till 30.06.2013. The sale deed could not be executed even on 30.06.2013 as the appellant raised a further demand of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lacs only) more for the execution of the sale deed. In view of the same, the sale deed could not be executed and the respondent asked for the refund of the bayana money. The appellant failed to refund the said amount and thus, the respondent had filed a suit for recovery against the appellant. Learned Trial Court decreed the said suit in favour of the respondent (original plaintiff) and against the appellant (original defendant).

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 12:15:36

4. Mr. Shafiq Khan, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the respondent was not ready and willing to execute the bayana iqrarnama (Agreement to Sell). Learned counsel submits that since the respondent was not ready with the balance sale consideration, the said bayana iqrarnama was extended twice, even after that the respondent had failed to garner the entire sale consideration and thus, the sale deed could not be executed. Learned counsel further submits that since the respondent had failed to pay the balance sale consideration on time, the appellant is entitled to forfeit the bayana amount.

5. This matter requires consideration.

6. On the appellant taking steps, issue notice to the respondent through all permissible modes including electronic mode as well as dasti, returnable on 06.11.2023.

7. Subject to the appellant depositing 75% of the decretal amount with the Registrar General of this Court within six weeks from today, there shall be a stay of the operation of the impugned judgment. The Registry is directed to keep the said amount in an interest bearing FDR with auto renewal facility.

8. In the meanwhile, e-copy of the Trial Court record be requisitioned.

GAURANG KANTH, J MAY 17, 2023 N3 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/09/2023 at 12:15:37