Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

14.2 In support of his case that the Defendant is the owner of the suit flats, the Plaintiff in paragraphs 25, 26 and 27 of his Affidavit in Lieu of Evidence deposed as under:
"25. I say that in 1969 or thereabouts TCI offered the said suit property to the father of Defendant herein at book value of the flat in consideration of his service to the Company, and that the father of the Defendant requested TCI to transfer the same to his minor son Shri Basant Bhoruke, and accordingly TCI passed a resolution on 24.01.1973 agreeing to transfer the suit property to Defendant upon attaining majority or getting married and upon payment of book value. I say that subsequently an Agreement for Sale dated 29.05.1985 was executed by TCI in favour of Defendant. I say that Defendant did not pay the book value of the suit property and defaulted in payment of Society's maintenance charges. I say that in addition to this default various disputes cropped up between the family members and finally were referred to sole Arbitrator. I KPPNair 43 S-5086/98 say that on the basis of the resolution and Agreement of Sale the Award and Decree were passed by Sole Arbitrator and Hon'ble Calcutta High Court respectively transferring the suit property to Defendant. I say that as per Award passed by Sole Arbitrator dated 29.04.1994 converted into Decree of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court dated 05.02.1997 the suit property is transferred to Defendant unconditionally, therefore Defendant is the owner of the suit property and at the time of execution of the alleged conveyance deed dated 31.12.1999 TCI had no right title or interest over the property such that they could transfer the suit property to the Badriprasad Bhoruka Family Trust as alleged. I say that the Award and Decree clearly show that the Defendant is the absolute owner of the suit property. I further say that when TCI declared the properties in 1998 to the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court, they have not included the suit property, therefore it is clear that they had transferred said suit property to Defendant vide Arbitration Award and Decree to which both Defendant and his mother were signatories. I hereby produce on record and tender in evidence the copies of the aforesaid Arbitration Award dated 29.04.1994 and Court Decree dated 05.02. 1997 and pray that the same be taken on record, exhibited and admitted into evidence.
26. I say that without setting aside the Award and/or Decree TCI could not have transferred their right and title by Conveyance Deed dated 31.12.1999 to Badriprasad Bhoruka Family Trust, and therefore the said Conveyance Deed is null KPPNair 44 S-5086/98 and void. I say that the said Conveyance Deed was executed while there was an injunction on the Defendant from dealing with the property by Hon'ble Bombay High Court and for this reason also the said Conveyance Deed is null and void. I further say that the Hon'ble Division Bench of Bombay High Court vide their order dated 27.07.2001 has held that the suit property belongs to Defendant only.

TCI purchased the said flats at the inception, in or around the year 1968, and was allotted the said flats and car parking spaces and servants quarters as per the Resolution of the said Society dated 27th September, 1970. In 1968, TCI allowed the father of the Defendant late Shri Badriprasadji Bhoruka who was a Partner in TCI to occupy the same along with the members of his family, including himself. TCI was first a Partnership Firm and was then converted into a Private Limited Company and thereafter to a Public Limited Company, and Shri Badriprasad was the whole-time Director of TCI. Since Shri Badriprasad was instrumental in the growth and success of TCI, during the life time of late Shri Badriprasad, Shri P.D. Agarwal, Chairman of TCI offered to transfer the said flats in favour of Shri Badriprasad at book value in consideration of his valuable life-time services to TCI. The late Badriprasad had settled a Family Trust by the name Badriprasad Bhoruka Family Trust ('the Trust') vide Trust KPPNair 51 S-5086/98 Deed dated 10th September, 1966. In the said Trust Deed he had expressly stated his wish that all his properties, distributions and entitlements would belong to the Trust for the joint enjoyment of his family members, but since the Defendant was 8 years old at the time of Shri Badriprasad's death and therefore unaware of his affairs, in the year 1973 after the death of late Shri Badriprasad, TCI passed a Resolution dated 24th January,1973 wherein the Defendant was shown as the Nominee of his late father. Upon the Defendant attaining majority, the said Resolution was followed up by an Agreement of Sale dated 29th May, 1985 which required book value of the said flats to be paid by the Defendant as a condition precedent to the execution of the Agreement of Sale and the said flats were not transferred and continued to remain in the name of TCI. Multiple disputes ensued between the family members from 1985 onwards relating to property and shareholding issues leading to protracted litigation before this Court and the Calcutta High Court which are a matter of record. The Defendant has further deposed that all the disputes were finally referred to a Sole Arbitrator who passed his Award on 29th April, 1994 which was converted into Rule of Court on or about 5th February, 1997. The Award and Decree explicitly recorded that TCI remained the owner of the said flats and passed directions for transfer of the said flats in the name of the Defendant upon fulfilment of conditions, including payment of book value. However, even after the Arbitration Award and Decree, disputes continued between the family members as the Trustees of the Trust insisted that TCI should not transfer the said flats in KPPNair 52 S-5086/98 the name of the Defendant on the ground that it was the wish of his late father that the said flats be transferred to the Trust for the joint enjoyment of all family members and that the Defendant should not be made the sole owner thereof. In the year 1999, the mother of the Defendant late Kamladevi Bhoruka filed a Suit and obtained an injunction restraining TCI from transferring the said flats in favour of the Defendant. TCI decided to transfer the said flats to the Trust.

A. It is not true. Till 31.12.1999 TCI was the owner of those flats and from 31.12.1999 the Badriprasad Bhoruka Family Trust is the owner of those flats. At no point of time I ever became the owner of the said flats."

14.10 From the aforestated submissions of the Plaintiff and the Defendant as also the Cross-Examination of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, it is clear that the suit flats till date are not transferred in the name of the Defendant. It also KPPNair 58 S-5086/98 appears that the said flats were not transferred in the name of the Defendant because since the year 1985 the Defendant did not comply with the conditions insisted upon by TCI, viz. to pay the book value of the flats to TCI. It appears that TCI has on 31st December, 1999 transferred the flats in the name of the Trust. The Plaintiff has categorically stated in his Answer to Question No. 20 of his Cross-Examination that the basis on which he claims that the Defendant is the owner of the suit flats is the Resolution passed by TCI dated 24th January, 1973, the Agreement for Sale dated 29th May, 1985, Arbitration Award dated 29th April, 1994 and the Decree of Calcutta High Court dated 5th February, 1997. In none of these documents, the flats stood transferred in the name of the Defendant. In fact, in the case of Amol Bhalchandra Joshi and others vs. Deorao Santoshrao Bhongade2 a learned Single Judge of this Court has held that merely because a decree for specific performance is passed, it cannot be presumed that the decree-holder is bound to get a sale deed executed in his favour. The same would be complete only upon execution of a sale deed in favour of the decree-holder either by the vendor/judgment debtor or through the process of Court. Therefore, in my view, it is established that the Defendant is not the owner of the suit flats and Issue No. 6 is therefore answered in the negative.