A buyer's refusal to accept a property due to cloud on title and lack of access is justified, allowing for a refund of advance payment with interest.

ORDER :

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J.

1. The present suit has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking specific performance of the Receipt-cum-Agreement to Sell dated 11.12.2019 (‘ATS’) executed between the Plaintiff and Defendant, with respect to land measuring 1 Bigha 12 Biswa comprised in Khasra No. 185/1 min East (1-03) and Khasra No. 185/2 min East (0-09), situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Khanpur, Tehsil Mehrauli, Sainik Farms, New Delhi, along with the super-structure, tube-wells, boundary wall etc. built thereon and marked as ‘Plot A’ in the Site Plan annexed with the Sale Deed dated 16.04.1993 (‘Subject Plot’).

1.1. The Plaintiff in the alternative seeks refund of the part sale consideration paid under the ATS.

1.2. The Plaintiff inter-alia seeks relief of permanent injunction against the Defendant from selling, alienating or creating any third-party interest in any manner with respect to the title and possession of the Subject Plot.

2. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Vide order dated 26.05.2025, time for filing written submissions was granted to the parties but none of the parties have filed the written submissions.

Facts germane for adjudication of the present suit

4. The captioned suit has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking specific performance of ATS and in the alternative the Plaintiff has prayed for recovery of Rs. 3.30 Crores towards refund, interest, losses and damages along with pendent-lite and future interest at 18% per annum.

4.1. The subject matter of the captioned suit is the Subject Plot. The ATS records that Plaintiff had agreed to purchase the Subject Plot for a sum of Rs. 3.30 Crores. As per the averment in the plaint an amount of Rs. 40 Lakh has been paid over to the Defendant by the Plaintiff on 11.12.2019 and balance amount of Rs. 2.90 Crores was to be paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant at the time of handover of vacant possession of the Subject Plot.

4.2. It is stated in the plaint that a large tract of land admeasuring 4 Bighas and 16 Biswa was owned by one Lt. Col. S.S. Kamal. It is stated that he divided this large tract of land into three (3) parts, each measuring 1 Bigha and 12 Biswa. The three (3) parts were assigned a private number i.e., Plot A, Plot B and Plot C respectively.

4.3. Plot A (i.e., Subject Plot) was purchased by the Defendant from Lt. Col. S.S. Kamal vide registered sale deed dated 16.04.1993. Plot B and Plot C were purchased by Defendant’s brother and Defendant’s sister-in-law respectively. However, since Plots A, B and C were initially owned by a common individual (i.e., Lt. Col. S.S. Kamal), it is a large tract of land, which is bounded on all sides and there is only one (1) entry and exit gate from Plot B, which is owned by the Defendant’s brother. The site plan of the larger tract depicting, Plot A, Plot B and Plot C with the boundary wall and the single entry and exit from Plot B is annexed to the Defendant’s sale deed dated 16.04.1993. The said site plan is reproduced herein below for reference:

4.4. Summons in the captioned suit were issued to the Defendant vide order dated 07.03.2022 and the Defendant was directed to file written statement as well as affidavit of admission/denial of documents within four (4) weeks. However, since the Defendant elected to not file written statement, his right was foreclosed vide order dated 10.04.2024.

Interim A