1. This is a suit for specific performance of the agreement and in the alternative for recovery of the liquidated damages. It is alleged in the plaint that in the year 1989, the plaintiff booked 2 three bed room flats having an area of 1800 sq. ft. each at Curzon Road, New Delhi, by paying Rs. 3 lac each to the defendant. It is further alleged that the defendant assured the plaintiff from time to time that the construction work was in progress and the flats would be handed over to it, as soon as the construction was complete. It is further alleged that in January, 1994, when the representative of the plaintiff visited the office of the defendant, he was informed that since there was chronic delay in completion of the project at 7, Curzon Road, some alternative arrangements were being by allotting apartments at the residential complex being constructed at Janpath Lane. The plaintiff conveyed its acceptance of the alternative allotment vide its letter dated 26.2.1994. However, no allotment to the plaintiff was made even at Janpath Lane and it was informed that the property being situated in Luyten’s Delhi, time was being taken for obtaining necessary clearance. It is further alleged that in the year 2005, the plaintiff was informed by the defendant that allotment of the apartments was likely to be expedited. Since no allotment was forthcoming, the plaintiff served a legal notice upon the defendant. Vide its letter dated 17.6.2006, the defendant informed that plaintiff that vide communication dated 5.12.1990, it was informed to the plaintiff to opt for flats at Ferozshah Road which the plaintiff did not accept. The case of the plaintiff is that in fact no offer of allotment of flats at Ferozshah Road was made to it vide letter dated 5.12.1990 and this letter was never received by it. The defendant, with a view to close the matter, forwarded a cheque of Rs. 15,45,433/-as full and final settlement of claims. It is further alleged that the plaintiff has always been ready to pay the balance amount of money as and when demanded by the defendant and it is only the defendant which has failed to deliver the flats despite promised to allot the flats. The plaintiff has sought a decree directing the defendant to perform their part of the agreement by allotting two flats to it. As an alternative relief, the plaintiff has sought recovery of damages amounting to Rs. 1,50,00,000/- (Rupees one crore and fifty lac) from the defendant.

2. The defendant has contested the suit and has taken a number of preliminary objections. Some of the preliminary objections taken by the defendant are that the alleged agreement between the parties is void being vague and uncertain, the suit is barred by limitation and has not been properly valued for the purposes of court fee and jurisdiction.

On merits, it has been alleged that the registration with the defendant did not confer any legal right upon the plaintiff to seek distribution of the apartments from the defendant since no concluded contract ever came into existence between the parties. It is further alleged that the proposed residential scheme in Connaught Place was only a proposal and not a final scheme, which later on came to be shelved for various reasons. It is also alleged that vide letter dated 5.12.1990, the plaintiff was informed that if it was interested for allotment of apartments at Ferozshah Road, it could contact the defendant company. This offer granted by the defendant to the plaintiff was made out of benevolence, though the plaintiff was not entitled to any such offer. It is further alleged that the plaintiff did not approach the defendant company for allotment of apartments at Ferozshah Road. It is also alleged that the defendant paid a sum of Rs. 15,45,433/- to the plaintiff after deducting tax of Rs. 2,73,536/- thereby making a total payment of Rs. 18,18,969/- which include Rs. 12,18,969/- towards interest @ 12% per annum.

3. The following issues were framed on 12.01.2012:

1. W