Yogeshwar Dayal, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition is directed against an order of learned Commercial Sub-Judge, Delhi, dated 22nd February, 1983, whereby the learned Commercial Sub-Judge, accepted an application filed by the plaintiff Under the provisions of Order 37 Rule 2 Sub-rule (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff/respondent had filed a suit under the provisions of Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recovery of Rs. 20. 900. 00 against the petitioner.

( 3 ) THE case of the plaintiff/respondent in the plaint was that the defendant entered into an agreement dated 23rd May, 1981 with the plaintiff to sell a piece of land situated in Gurgaon measuring about 160 sq. yards. It was pleaded that the defendant represented himself to be the owner of the said property and agree to sell the land for a total consideration of Rs. l,25,000. 00 At the time of execution of the said agreement on May 23, 1981, the defendant received from the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 10. 000. 00 as part payment of the total consideration and receipt thereof was also executed. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement, the defendant agreed and was obliged to produce to the plaintiff before August 7, 1981, title deeds pertaining to the said property particularly the original sale deed dated April 29. 1977 executed by Haryana Urban Development Authority ; permission from the Competent Authority and the employee of the defendant to sell the said property ; certificate of valuation from a Government approved valuer; approved plan of the said property ; income-tax clearance certificate and other documents pertaining to the said property. It was stated that it was a term of the said agreement that the defendant should execute a proper sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and should get it duly registered on or before 7th August 1981. The balance consideration amount of Rs. l,15,000. 00 was agreed to be paid by. the plaintiff to the defendant before the concerned Sub-Registrar at the -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . time of registration of proper sale deed. It was also the terms of the said agreement that in case defend ant failed to execute and duly registered proper sale deed, the defendant would be liable to refund the said amount of Rs. 10,000. 00 received by him at the time of execution of the said agreement alongwith another sum of Rs, 10,000. 00 by way of liquidated damages.

( 4 ) IT was further pleaded in the plaint that on two occasions before August 7, 1981 the plaintiff called upon the defendant and the defendant promised that he would definitely comply with the conditions of the agreement and would duly execute and register proper sale deed as per the terms thereof. Thereafter, the defendant deliberately and maliciously avoided the plaintiff. It was further pleaded that the plaintiff was always ready and willing to have the sale deed executed and registered and thus the defendant as per the terms of the agreement is liable to pay Rs. 20,000. 00 to the plaintiff.

( 5 ) IT was further pleaded that on August 8, 1981, the defendant expressed his inability to produce all the relevant documents. It was also pleaded that the defendant represented to the plaintiff that the original sale deed dated April 29, 1977 executed in his favour was in the possession of his employer in the Ministry of Post and Telegraphs, Parliament Street, New Delhi, against a loan taken by the defendant from his employer and unless the said loan amount was repaid, the sale deed would not be available. The plaintiff demanded the defendant to pay Rs. . 20. 000. 00 which the defendant was liable to pay under the terms and conditions of the agreement.

( 6 ) IT was further pleaded that on or about 10th November, 1981, the plaintiff came to know that in or around August, 1981 the defendant had purchased a house bearing No. WZ-1597-A (Opposite to Punjab National Bank), Rani Bagh, New Delhi, for Rs. 60,000. 00 and he had paid a total consideration amount for the purc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document