The main legal point established in the judgment is that the suit for Specific Performance of an Agreement to Sell was clearly barred by the law of limitation as per Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

JUDGMENT

I.A. 13371/2022

1. This application has been filed by the defendant under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as `the CPC') praying for rejection of the plaint on the ground of the suit being barred by the law of limitation.

2. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff praying for a decree of Specific Performance of the Agreement to Sell dated 17.01.2015 and receipt dated 17.01.2015 in respect of the suit land being 1/8th share of agriculture land measuring 142 bigha (i.e. 335 biswas (16 Bigha and 15 biswas)], out of Khasra Nos.32//14(0-19), 15(4-4), 16(1-17), 25(0-7), 26(0-1),33//11(4-16), 19(6-12), 20(4-8), 21 (3-6), 40//7(2-13), 13(4-16). 14(4-13). 15(1-10), 64//25(5-1 0). 63//21 (4-8), 70//24/1 (0-6), 71//4(3-13), 5(4-16), 7(6-5). 72//1(4-16), 72//2/1 (2-0), 75//23(4-16), 24(4-16), 78//20(2-13), 79//3(4-16), 4(4-16), 7(4-16), 8(4-16), 13(4-16), 14(4-16), 16(4-16), 17(4-16), 18(4-16), 40//4/1(1-17), 40//8/2(4-0), 40//9/2(1-0) situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Dariyapur Kalan, Delhi-110039 (hereinafter referred to as the `suit land').

3. In the suit, it is the case of the plaintiff that in the month of October 2014, Shri Jagpal Chikara, the husband of the defendant, approached Shri Om Prakash Gupta, the Director of the plaintiff, for a loan of Rs.2,24,00,000/- in favour of his wife, the defendant herein. As Shri Chikara was having good relations with Shri Gupta, a loan was provided to the defendant on an assurance that the same shall be returned within a period of three months from the date of its disbursal. The plaintiff claims that the loan amount was disbursed in the name of the defendant vide cheques dated 24.10.2014 for a sum of Rs.80,00,000/-; cheque dated 25.10.2014 for a sum of Rs.85,00,000/-; and through RTGS on 25.10.2014 for a sum of Rs.59,00,000/-.

4. The plaintiff claims that the defendant returned only a sum of Rs.14,00,000/- of the loan amount on 05.11.2014, thereby leaving a balance of Rs.2,10,00,000/-.

5. It is further claimed that in January 2015, Shri Chikara approached Shri Gupta and expressed his inability to repay the said loan. He offered that in lieu thereof, the suit land be purchased by the plaintiff. Accordingly, to maintain a good relationship, the offer was accepted, and after due negotiations, the plaintiff entered into an Agreement to Sell dated 17.01.2015 with the defendant whereunder, the defendant agreed to sell the suit land to the plaintiff. The sale consideration was agreed at Rs.2,51,45,833/-, out of which a sum of Rs.2,10,00,000/- was already received by the defendant, thereby leaving a balance of an amount of only Rs.41,45,833/-, which was to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant at the time of the execution of the Sale Deed. The said Agreement to Sell duly records that a sum of Rs.2,10,00,000/- has already been received by the defendant and a receipt dated 17.01.2015 for the said amount was also signed by the defendant acknowledging the receipt of the said amount.

6. The plaintiff further states that in terms of the Agreement to Sell, the defendant was to apply for a No Objection Certificate (in short, `NOC') from the concerned Tehsildar (Notification), Revenue Authorities, which was a mandatory requirement before the execution of the Sale Deed. In the Agreement to Sell, it was further agreed that the defendant shall intimate the plaintiff about the receipt of the NOC fifteen days in advance before the date of the registration of the Sale Deed for the suit land in favour of the plaintiff.

7. It is averred in the plaint that Shri Chikara approached the plaintiff in the month of December 2015 and asked for signatures of the plaintiff on the application for the grant of the NOC. The same was duly signed by Shri Gupta. Shri Chikara assured Shri Gupta that the NOC shall be immediately applied for before the Revenue Authorities and the same would be available in about a month's time from the date of the filing of