( 1 ) ARGUMENTS in this case were heard on 10/01/2001 and judgment was reserved. However, at that stage counsel for both the parties had requested that the judgment be held over for at least two weeks in order to give an opportunity to the parties to reach an amicable settlement regarding the controversy in the suit. More than two weeks have passed. However, there is no information about any settlement having been reached between the parties. We accordingly proceed to pronounce the judgment.

( 2 ) AN Agreement to Sell dated 5/01/1991 in respect of properties bearing Nos. 636, 637-1/2, 641-1/2 and 642 situated at Chandni Chowk was alleged to have been executed between the appellant and respondent. As per that Agreement, respondent had agreed to sell the aforesaid properties to the appellant for a total consideration of Rs. 3. 80 lakhs. Rs. 50,000. 00 was paid by the appellant to the respondent as earnest money. Respondent was to obtain income tax clearance from the Income-tax Department.

( 3 ) THE appellant herein filed Suit No. 863/98 which was a suit for permanent injunction against the respondent herein in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Delhi. After mentioning about