Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Late Mahendra Pal Since Deceased Thr. ... vs Deepak Gupta And Ors. on 3 October, 2019
Bench: Uday Umesh Lalit, Indira Banerjee, M.R. Shah
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)NO. 18869 OF 2018
LATE MAHENDRA PAL SINCE DECEASED
THR. LRs. …Petitioners
VERSUS
DEEPAK GUPTA AND ORS. …Respondents
O R D E R
1. The instant matter arises out of a suit filed by the respondent- plaintiff in respect of House No. 252, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh, seeking decree for specific performance of Agreement to Sell dated 11.06.2002.
2. In terms of said agreement, the house was to be sold in two-halves and at two stages. The first part of the transaction was to be executed by a particular date which date was extended to 30.09.2002, while the second part was to be completed by 30.10.2002. The consideration was fixed at Rs.2.16 crores. A sum of rupees thirty lakhs by way of advance was paid Signature Not Verified on the date of the agreement. According to the agreement, for the first part Digitally signed by INDU MARWAH Date: 2019.10.15 10:42:36 IST Reason: of the transaction, the consideration was fixed at Rs.1.08 crores while the second part would be sold for a further sum of Rs.1.08 crores. 2
3. According to the record, as on 30.09.2002, the plaintiff had kept two demand drafts aggregating to Rs1.08 crores ready which sum was over and above what he had initially paid by way of earnest money on the date of the agreement. He had also kept ready Stamp Papers in the sum of Rs.6.48 lakhs. The record indicates that an NOC from the Estate Office, Chandigarh Administration was also obtained which was in force on 30.09.2002. The plaintiff presented himself in the office of the Registrar but the Vendor-defendant was not present and the matter could not be taken to logical conclusion.
4. The plaintiff thereafter kept demand draft in the sum of Rs.78 lakhs ready before 30.10.2002 and also sent a draft sale deed in respect of the entire house for Rs.2.16 crores. Thus, as on 30.10.2002, the plaintiff had kept the demand drafts in the sum of Rs.1.78 crores ready, while amount of Rs.30 lakhs was in deposit with the defendant.
5. In the circumstances, the suit for specific performance instituted by the plaintiff was decreed by the Trial Court after finding the plaintiff to be ready and willing, which view was affirmed by the Lower Appellate court. The second appeal arising therefrom has been dismissed by the High Court by order presently under appeal.
6. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, we have gone through the record and we have also considered the rival 3 submissions. In our view, the assessment made by the courts below was quite correct and does not call for any interference.
7. Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, learned senior advocate for the defendant then relied upon the decision of this Court in Satya Jain (Dead) through LRs. and others vs. Anis Ahmed Rushdie (Dead) through LRs. and others1. He submitted that on same principles, the defendant be held entitled to the present market value.
8. We have gone through the decision and find that it was in the light of peculiar facts involved in the matter. However, considering the fact that the agreement in the present case was entered into in the year 2002, in our view, ends of justice would be met, if the plaintiff pays a further sum of Rs.1 crore over and above the agreed price.
9. It may be stated that amount of Rs.1.86 crores has already been deposited by the plaintiff in the Trial Court, in pursuance of decree passed in his favour and a sum of Rs.30 lakhs was already made over to the defendant. The price in terms of the original agreement thus stands paid or deposited.
10. We, therefore, direct as under:-
i) The plaintiff shall deposit a further sum of Rupees one crore within two weeks from today in the Trial Court.
ii) All the heirs of the defendant shall file affidavits within four 1 (2013) 8 SCC 131 4 weeks from today in this Court that they shall execute a sale deed in respect of House No.252, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh, in favour of the plaintiff within three months from today.
iii) Upon the execution of the sale deed by the heirs of the defendant, they shall be entitled to withdraw the amount of Rs.1.86 crores already deposited by the plaintiff in the Trial Court along with interest accrued thereon as well as the amount of Rs.1 crore deposited in the Trial Court as directed above.
iv) Simultaneously, the heirs of the defendant shall handover vacant and peaceful possession of the aforesaid House No.252, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh, to the plaintiff.
v) All the steps, as indicated above, shall be undertaken in the presence of a Competent Officer of the Registry of the Trial Court, who may be nominated by the Trial Court; and soon thereafter, a compliance report shall be submitted in this Court.
vi) In case, the heirs of the defendant fail to:
a) file the undertakings in this Court, as stated above;
or
b) execute the sale deed, as directed above; or
c) hand over vacant and peaceful possession of said House No.252, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh, as 5 directed above;
said heirs of the defendant shall not be entitled to the sum of Rs.1 crore deposited in the Trial Court as indicated above and in such eventuality:
a) the plaintiff shall be entitled to withdraw said sum of Rs.1 crore from the Trial Court; and
b) shall also be entitled to get the sale deed in respect of said House No.252, Sector 16-A, Chandigarh, executed through the Trial Court; and
c) which Sale Deed shall be executed within four months from today.
11. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms. No costs.
………………………………….J. [Uday Umesh Lalit] ………………………………….J. [Indira Banerjee] ………………………………….J. [M.R. Shah] New Delhi;
3rd October, 2019.
6
ITEM NO.7 COURT NO.7 SECTION IV-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 18869/2018
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 25-05-2018 in RSA No. 5898/2015 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh) LATE MAHENDRA PAL SINCE DECEASED THR. LRS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DEEPAK GUPTA AND ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 98595/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) WITH SLP(C) No. 1551/2019 (IV-B) ( IA No. 184986/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 96951/2019 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS /ANNEXURES) Date : 03-10-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH For Petitioner(s) Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Tarun Gupta, AOR Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Amandeep Jawanda, Adv.
Mr. Nidesh Gupta, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Anuj Rajput, Adv.
Ms. Pallavi, Adv.
Mr. Rakesh Kumar-i, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Divyakant Lahoti, AOR Mr. Parikshit Ahuja, Adv.
Ms. Amrita Grover, Adv.7
Ms. Praveena Bisht, Adv.
Mr. Madhur Jhavar, Adv.
Mr. Hussain, Ali, Adv.
Mr. K. Lahoti, Adv.
Ms. Mukunda Rao, adv.
Mr. Tarun Gupta, AOR Mr. Satyajeet Kumar, AOR Mr. Sudhir Naagar, AOR O R D E R SLP(C) No.18869/2018 The SLP is disposed of in terms of the signed order.SLP(C) No. 1551/2019
In terms the of order passed in SLP(C) No.18869/2018, the present SLP is also disposed of.
(INDU MARWAH) (SUMAN JAIN)
COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
(Signed order is placed on the file)