Back
2019 Supreme(Del) 1317
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
Dinesh Tanwar and Another - Appellants
Versus
Kunwar Singh Tanwar and Others - Respondents
Regular First Appeal No. 544 of 2016, 695 of 2016; Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 7381 of 2017, 20788 of 2017, 20809 of 2017, 23088 of 2017
Decided On : 15-04-2019
Madhu Sudan Bhayana, Adv., J.K. Sharma, Adv., Mahender Singh, Adv., Aabhas Dahiya, Adv., Achal Gupta, Adv., Annie Rais, Adv.
Headnote:
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Section 12 - Specific performance - Execution - Contempt - Specific performance of bayana - Defendants represented themselves to be the absolute owners - Time for execution of the sale deed was to expire on 14th August, 2010 - Advance of Rs. 1 lakh had been paid - Property actually belonged only to Devender Kumar - Consideration was paid by the subsequent purchasers - Cheques were issued and the cash payment was accepted - Usurption of the entire money paid by the subsequent purchasers - False statements about the second property - Selling of the property in question - Non deposition of the sum which was paid as consideration - She has sold his properties and appropriated all the sale consideration - She has violated orders passed by the court including order - Money has received from the subsequent purchasers and orders directing deposit of costs - Pratibha is held guilty of contempt of Court - Her conduct constitutes even civil contempt, which can be punished by this Court.
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
The Plaintiff - Shri Kanwar Singh Tanwar (hereinafter, "Plaintiff") filed the present suit for specific performance of bayana cum receipt agreement dated 15th March, 2010 against Mr. Devender Kumar and Mrs. Pratibha (hereinafter, "Defendants"), both residents of WZ-508, Village Basai Dara Pur, New Delhi. The case of the Plaintiff was that the Defendants represented themselves to be the absolute owners of property bearing No. WZ-523/30, situated at village Basai Dara Pur, New Delhi admeasuring 170 Sq. Yards (hereinafter, "suit property"). The agreed sale consideration was at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per sq. yard i.e. for a total consideration of Rs.59,50,000/-. According to the Plaintiff, the period for execution of the sale deed, in terms of the agreement, was to expire on 14th August, 2010. The Plaintiff had paid an advance of Rs.1 lakh. The Plaintiff approached the Defendants on several occasions that he is ready with the balance sale consideration, however, the Defendants avoided the issue and failed to even give original title documents to the Plaintiff.
2. Thereafter, legal notice dated 3rd July, 2010 was issued, calling upon the Defendants to appear before the Sub-Registrar on 16th August, 2010, to execute the sale deed in favour of the Plaintiff. However, the Defendants did not turn up. The Plaintiff then filed a suit for permanent injunction as he was apprehending that the Defendants may create third party interest in the suit property. The suit bearing No.143/2010 was filed before the Ld. Senior Civil Judge, Delhi seeking injunction. The Defendants moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, in the said suit, on the ground that the said suit is not maintainable, as an alternate remedy of specific performance was available to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the present suit came to be filed where the Plaintiff seeks the following reliefs:
"In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass a decree of specific performance in favour of the plaintiff, and against the defendants, thereby directing the defendants to specifically perform their part of the contract in terms of the bayana receipt cum agreement dated 15.03.2010 and to transfer the property/land bearing No.WZ 523/30, situated at Village Basai Darapur, New Delhi, total measuring 170 sq. yds., by executing the necessary sale documents in respect of the said property in favour of the plaintiff on receipt of the balance sale consideration amount of Rs.58,50,000/- (Rupees fifty eight lacs and fifty thousand only). In case, the defendants fail to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the said property on receipt of the balance consideration amount of Rs.58,50,000/- (Rupees fifty eight and fifty thousand only) in that event, this Hon'ble Court may be please to appoint an officer of this Hon'ble Court to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the aforesaid property, in accordance with the bayana receipt cum agreement dated 15.03.2010; Costs of the present suit/proceedings be also awarded in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. Such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case be also passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants to meet the ends of justice. It is prayed accordingly."
3. Summons were issued in the suit on 27th September, 2010. Thereafter, on 22nd March, 2011, the parties were referred to mediation. In the meantime, the Defendants filed their written statement. The case of the Defendants was that the bayana receipt dated 15th March, 2010 stood repudiated on 26th May, 2010. It was pleaded that on 11th May, 2010, the Defendants called upon the Plaintiff to produce the original bayana receipt
