BADAR DURREZ AHMED
KULDLP GANDOTRA – Appellant
Versus
SHAILENDRA NATH ENDLAY – Respondent
( 2 ) IN the plaint, the plaintiff has averred that on 31-3-2004, an agreement to sell in respect of the said flat was entered into by the plaintiff as the intending purchaser and the defendant No. 1 as the intending seller. The said agreement was entered on behalf of the defendant No. 1 by the defendant No. 2 who held a general power of attorney in her favour. It is further stated in the plaint that the defendant No. 1 had acquired the said flat on allotment from the Delhi development Authority (DDA) and the same was a leasehold property. It is averred that the same was eligible for conversion into freehold on payment of the prescribed charges as per the policy of the DDA. It is further stated that the said flat was in occupation of a tenant who had been inducted by the defendant No. 1 and that the sale would be completed after the property is vacated by the tenant and that at the time of registration, vacant possession of the said flat would be handed over to the plain
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.