2011 Supreme(All) 1177

[2010(6) ADJ 39 (NOC)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : SHISHIR KUMAR, J.
MITTHOO YADAV ....Defendant/Applicant
Versus
DURJAN YADAV ....Plaintiff/Respondent
(Second Appeal No. 361 of 2011, decided on 21st April, 2011)

Headnote:Specific Relief Act, 1963—Section 16-C—Limitation Act, 1963—Article 54—Specific performance—Agreement to sale—Execution of—In present case an agreement was executed for sale of property—An agreement was executed after payment of earnest money—Rest of amount was to be paid at time of execution of sale-deed—Specific condition in Clause IV of agreement was that as there is a requirement of permission from ceiling authority—Therefore, defendant has to obtain permission—And to intimate plaintiff for execution of sale-deed—Admittedly, after execution of agreement, defendant has not discharged his burden and never intimated this fact—When in 2003, plaintiff came to know regarding repeal of Ceiling Act—Then, immediately he sent a registered notice—But, defendant has not executed sale-deed, then he filed a suit—Held, before sending registered letter, there was no necessity on behalf of plaintiff/Respondent to prove regarding compliance of Section 16-C—Limitation will run from date of intimation by defendant in view of Clause IV of agreement because defendant was to intimate—From date of intimation, period of three years will run for purposes of filing suit—Appellate Court justified in holding that period of filing suit—Cannot be counted from date of agreement in view of clause IV of agreement.