JUDGMENT - KARNIK D.G., J.:---This appeal came up for hearing on admission on 14th January, 2003 when the learned Counsel for the parties agreed that the appeal should be heard finally at the stage of admission itself and was accordingly adjourned for final hearing. Appeal then came up for final hearing on 22nd January, 2003 and after hearing for sometime was adjourned several times for settlement. As the settlement was not possible, hearing was continued and concluded today.

FACTS

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by reference of their original status in the suit. The plaintiff is the owner of several properties bearing C.T.S. Nos. 150, 150/-1 to 6, 151, 152, 152/1 2 together admeasuring about 6,251.30 sq. metres and more particularly described in Clause 1 of Exhibit A to the plaint which are hereafter referred to as the suit properties. The plaintiff is also the owner of some other properties in respect of which separate agreement/s were executed between the parties but, which are not the subject-matter of the suit. By an agreement dated 29th September, 1986 executed by the plaintiff on the first part and promoters of defendant No. 3 company on the second part, the plaintiff agreed to entrust the development rights in respect of the suit properties in favour of defendant No. 3 which was then under incorporation but it was subsequently in corporated. The defendant No. 3 company was subsequently incorporated and it is common ground between the parties that the agreement was thereafter regarded as an agreement entered between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 3 company and was acted as such. Under the said agreement, the defendant No. 3 agreed to pay to the plaintiff the consideration calculated at Rs. 150/- per sq.ft. of the Floor Space Index (for short F.S.I.) permitted for development by the Municipal Corporation of Brihan Mumbai which is the defendant No. 1 in the suit. Clause 6(a) of the agreement shows that a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- was paid as earnest money and further sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- was to be paid by the developers (defendant No. 3) within a period of 30 days of the obtaining of the Intimation of Development (For short IDD). The entire balance except Rs. 50,000/- was to be paid within 30 days of the obtaining of the Commencement Certificate. The agreement contains usual clauses regarding the rights of defendant No. 3 to carry not the building construction and to sell flats, shops, offices etc. in the buildings to be constructed on the suit properties and giving of Power of Attorney by the plaintiff to the defendant No. 3 or its nominees. The agreement did not contain a clause of termination. On 19th November, 1986 a supplementary agreement was executed between the plaintiff on one hand and the promoters of defendant No. 3 on the other hand under which all the terms and conditions of the previous agreement dared 29th September, 1986 except to the extent modified by the supplemental agreement were to remain in force. Clause 3 of the supplemental agreement dated 19th November, 1986 conferred a right and option to the plaintiff either to terminate the original agreement dated 29th September, 1986, if, the defendant No. 3 did not pay the consideration within 90 days of the due date or to claim interest at 18% p.a. from the expiry of 90 days. In pursuance of the said agreement dated 29th September, 1986 the plaintiff has executed a power of attorney in favour of three persons namely Mr. Waynee C.D. Lima and Mr. Julian A.D.' Souza and Mr. Sunil C. Pereira who were the directors of defendant No. 3 company. The third attorney Mr. Julian A.S. Souza was son of the plaintiff and has since died. The deed of Power of Attorney authorises the attorneys to do all necessary things in furtherance of the agreement dated 29th September, 1986 and specifically authorises the attorneys to appoint architects, engineers and surveyors. Before granting of the power of attorney on 3rd August, 1990 the plaintiff on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document