Delhi District Court
Sh. Ravi Khanna vs Sh. Yashpal Chhabra on 31 October, 2019
IN THE COURT OF SH. M. P. SINGH, ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
JUDGE03 (EAST DISTRICT), KARKARDOOM COURTS, DELHI
CS No. 569/18
In the matter of:
Sh. Rajesh Khanna,
son of Late Joginder Prakash Khanna
R/o U13, Naveen Shahdara, Delhi - 32.
Sh. Ravi Khanna,
son of Late Joginder Prakash Khanna
R/o U13, Naveen Shahdara, Delhi - 32. ......Plaintiffs
Versus
Sh. Yashpal Chhabra,
S/o Late Hira Nand Chhabra,
R/o 2nd Floor, 37, Defence Enclave,
Delhi110092 ......Defendant
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF Rs. 12,46,312/ WITH PENDENTE LITE
AND FUTURE INTEREST OF 18% PER ANNUM AND COSTS
Suit instituted on - 27.07.2018
Arguments heard on - 31.10.2019
Judgment pronounced on - 31.10.2019
JUDGMENT
1. Plaintiffs, vide a registered sale deed dt. 16.01.2008 (Ex.PW1/1), purchased basement of property no. 37, Defence Enclave, Delhi - 92 (for short the 'suit property') from the defendant. Clause 10 of the Sale Deed is as follows, "That the vendor shall be liable and responsible for all the CS No.569/18 Rajesh Khanna & Anr, Vs. Yashpal Chhabra Page 1 of 6 dues/arrears regarding House Tax, Water and Electricity charges pertaining to the above mentioned property under sale till the date of execution of this SALE DEED and in future the VENDEES will pay all taxes, dues, house tax and other charges of the above mentioned property under sale to the authority concerned."
2. Plaintiffs aver that at the time of execution of the sale deed, a sum of Rs. 2,55,597/ was due and outstanding in relation to the suit property towards the property tax to East Delhi Municipal Corporation (EDMC). Further, as per the plaintiffs, another sum of Rs. 9,82,797/ was due and outstanding in relation to the suit property towards conversion charges, parking charges and additional FAR charges to EDMC.
3. The defendant requested the plaintiff to clear the aforesaid outstanding dues and gave an assurance to reimburse the same later.
4. Accordingly, plaintiffs paid Rs. 2,63,515/ (Rs. 2,55,597/ plus interest) to EDMC on defendant's behalf towards property tax for the period up to the sale deed. Plaintiffs also paid Rs. 9,82,797/ on defendant's behalf to EDMC towards the conversion charges, parking charges and additional FAR charges till the execution of the sale deed. Thus, the plaintiffs paid total sum of Rs. 12,46,312/ to EDMC. These payments were made through cheques/demand drafts drawn on bank accounts of the plaintiffs and proprietorship firm of namely M/s Chitra Advertising Service of one of the plaintiffs.
5. In partial discharge of his liability, the defendant issued following CS No.569/18 Rajesh Khanna & Anr, Vs. Yashpal Chhabra Page 2 of 6 two cheques: (a) cheque (Ex. PW1/5) no. 345412 dt. 15.02.2018 of Rs. 2 lacs drawn on Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar, Delhi in favour of plaintiff no. 1 Rajesh Khanna, and (b) cheque (Ex. PW1/6) no. 345414 dt. 20.02.2018 of Rs. 1.40 lac drawn on Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar, Delhi in favour of plaintiff no.2 Ravi Khanna. Both these cheques were dishonoured due to insufficient funds. Plaintiffs' legal notices dt. 16.06.2018 (Ex. PW1/9) intimating the defendant about dishonour of the cheques was served upon the latter but it was of no avail. Plaintiffs' second legal notice dt. 02.07.2018 (Ex. PW1/10) calling upon the defendant to pay the entire amount was refused to be accepted by the defendant. On these averments, plaintiffs filed the present suit.
6. Defendant was served by way of refusal. He neither appeared nor did he file his written statement. He suffered the proceedings ex parte vide order dt. 26.09.2018.
7. In ex parte plaintiffs' evidence, both the plaintiffs examined themselves as PW1 and PW2 respectively. PW3 Govind Saran Sharma, Junior Engineer from EDMC deposed that on 26.02.2018 a sum of Rs. 9,82,797/ was paid towards conversion fees, parking charges and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) charges to EDMC vide receipt Ex. PW1/3. PW4, a bank official from HDFC Bank, Vikas Marg, Delhi exhibited on record the bank statement of accounts Ex. PW4/1 of M/s Chitra Advertising Services (proprietorship of plaintiff no. 1), bank statement of accounts Ex. PW4/2 of plaintiff no. 1 Sh. Rajesh Khanna and the bank statement of accounts Ex.
CS No.569/18 Rajesh Khanna & Anr, Vs. Yashpal Chhabra Page 3 of 6PW4/3 of plaintiff no. 2 Ravi Khanna. PW5 an official witness from EDMC proved the payment of Rs. 2,63,515/ towards property tax charges.
8. Arguments heard. Record perused.
9. The evidences of the plaintiffs (PW1 and PW2) remain unrebutted and unchallenged. Plaintiffs (PW1 and PW2) in their depositions have deposed entirely along the same lines as averred in the plaint. The unrebutted and unchallenged testimony of plaintiffs (PW1 and PW2) establishes that they had purchased the suit property vide registered sale deed Ex. PW1/1 dt. 16.01.2018. Their unrebutted evidence further establishes that they had paid Rs. 2,63,515/ (Rs. 2,55,597/ plus interest) to EDMC on defendant's behalf towards property tax for the period up to the sale deed in relation to the suit property. Their unrebutted depositions further establishes that they had also paid Rs. 9,82,797/ on defendant's behalf to EDMC towards conversion charges, parking charges and additional FAR charges till the execution of the sale deed in relation to the suit property. Thus, the plaintiffs paid total sum of Rs. 12,46,312/ to EDMC. The evidence of PW3 establishes that a sum of Rs. 9,82,797/ was paid towards conversion fees, parking charges and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) charges to EDMC vide receipt dt. 26.02.2018 (Ex. PW1/3) till the execution of the sale deed. The evidence of PW5 establishes that vide a receipt (Ex. PW5/1) dt. 09.06.2018 Rs. 2,63,515/ had been deposited in the names of Rajesh Khanna and Ravi Khanna in relation to the suit property. It is pertinent to mention that PW5, inter alia, deposed that as per CS No.569/18 Rajesh Khanna & Anr, Vs. Yashpal Chhabra Page 4 of 6 the contents of receipt Ex. PW5/1, the payment of Rs. Rs. 2,63,515/ was received against dishonour of cheque no. 000038 dt. 30.01.2018 of Rs. 2,55,597/. PW5 further deposed that the aforesaid amount of Rs. 2,63,515/ is inclusive of the interest and had been paid towards arrears of property tax in relation to the suit property.
10. The evidence of PW4 (a bank witness) establishes that the payment of property tax arrears up till the date of sale deed amounting Rs. 2,63,515/ had been paid through a Manager's Cheque dt. 06.06.2018 from the bank account of plaintiff no. 1 Rajesh Khanna. The evidence of PW4 further establishes that conversion charges, parking charges and additional FAR charges up till the date of sale deed to EDMC was done through three different Manager's Cheques out of the bank account of M/s Chitra Advertising Service which is stated to be a proprietorship firm of plaintiff no. 1 Rajesh Khanna.
11. The unrebutted and unchallenged evidence led by the plaintiffs establishes that the defendant is liable to pay Rs. 12,46,312/ to them. Section 69 of Contract Act mandates that a person who is interested in payment of money which another is bound by law to pay, and who therefore pays it, is entitled to be reimbursed by the other. Further, section 55 (1) (g) of Transfer of Property Act mandates that the vendor, in the absence of contract to the contrary, is liable to pay all the public charges together with interest up till the date of the sale deed. In the case at hand, the terms of the sale deed Ex. PW1/1 require that the public charges up till CS No.569/18 Rajesh Khanna & Anr, Vs. Yashpal Chhabra Page 5 of 6 the date of the sale deed shall be paid by the defendant. There can be no manner of doubt that the property tax arrears up to the date of sale deed are to be borne by the vendor (defendant). Further, the payment of charges for conversion fees, parking charges and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) charges up till the date of sale deed are to be borne by the vendor (defendant). Non payment of conversion fees, parking charges and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) charges reflects that the defendant had not been paying the same to EDMC. Plaintiffs are thus entitled to recover Rs. 12,46,312/ from the defendant. On this amount, plaintiffs are awarded pendente lite and future interest of 6% per annum. Plaintiffs are also awarded costs of the suit.
12. Relief: The present suit stands decreed in the sum of Rs. 12,46,312/ in plaintiffs' favour and against the defendant together with pendente lite and future interest of 6% per annum thereon. Plaintiffs are awarded costs of the suit. Decree sheet be drawn up. File be consigned to record room.
Digitally signed byMURARI MURARI PRASAD SINGH PRASAD Location: Court No.7, ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN Karkardooma Courts, Delhi SINGH Date: 2019.10.31 COURT ON 31.10.2019 13:39:21 +0530 (MURARI PRASAD SINGH) ADJ03 (EAST) KARKARDOOMA COURTS DELHI/31.10.2019 CS No.569/18 Rajesh Khanna & Anr, Vs. Yashpal Chhabra Page 6 of 6