SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Del) 1667

PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Kushal Infraproject Industries India Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Dalel Singh – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Manik Dogra, Adv., Dhruv, Adv., Aditya Singh, Adv., Y.P. Narula, Adv., Abhey Narula, Adv., Taran Narula, Adv., Sonali Dhir, Adv., Aadhar Nauityal, Adv., Suman Chaudhary, Adv., Namit Bangia, Adv., Tara Narula, Adv.

Judgement Key Points

Based on the provided legal document, the recovery suit was deemed maintainable at this stage of proceedings. The court considered that the question of maintainability, particularly regarding whether a declaration that the termination was illegal was necessary, could be addressed at a later stage, such as during the final adjudication. The court emphasized that the absence of a specific declaration that the termination was illegal does not render the suit for recovery or damages inadmissible at this point. Furthermore, the court noted that the facts and circumstances presented in the plaints, including the allegations of breach and the conduct of the parties, support the maintainability of the recovery suit. The court also clarified that the proceedings before revenue authorities are independent and do not bar the filing or continuation of the recovery suit. Therefore, the recovery suit was considered maintainable and suitable for further proceedings.


JUDGMENT :

Prathiba M. Singh, J.

The present suits seek specific performance and alternatively, recovery/damages. Various agreements to sell and receipts-cum-agreements to sell were executed between the Plaintiff and the Defendants. Part payments, including of earnest money were made by the Plaintiff. However, there were allegations of breach made by both parties against each other. In all the suits, the agreements to sell/agreements-cum-receipts have been terminated on the ground of breach by the Plaintiffs, prior to the filing of the suits. Subsequent purchasers have also been impleaded in the suits as Defendants. The suits are at the stage of framing of issues. At this stage, the Ld. counsels for the Defendants have raised two preliminary objections which are as under:

(1) That the suits for specific performance are not maintainable as no declaration has been sought that the termination is illegal.

(2) That the Plaintiff is guilty of concealment of material facts and hence, the suits are liable to be dismissed.

2. The case of the Plaintiff on the one hand, is that it had fully complied with the various terms and conditions in the agreements to sell and that it is entitled to specific

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top