IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No. 885 of 2005 DR. PANKAJ KUMAR ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Huma Mahfooz, Advocate.

versus K.L. KATYAL ..... Defendant Through: Mr. M.S. Vinaik, Advocate.

CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR

O R D E R

03.09.2013

1. Dr. Pankaj Kumar has filed this suit against Shri K.S. Katyal for a decree of specific performance of the agreement to sell and purchase dated 19^th February 2005 thereby directing the Defendant to perform his part of the contract and execute title deeds in respect of the suit property i.e. Flat No. C- 1/A/98A, Pankha Road, Janakpuri, New Delhi (hereafter ‘the suit property’) in favour of the Plaintiff and in the alternative to direct the Defendant to pay the amount equivalent to the difference between the sale price and the market price of the suit property prevalent at the time of filing of the suit to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff has also sought a decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant from selling, transferring, alienating, creating any third party interest and/or parting with possession of the suit property in favour of any third person other than the Plaintiff.

2. The case of the Plaintiff as narrated in the plaint is that an agreement dated 19^th February 2005 was entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant whereby the Defendant agreed to sell the suit property for a total sale consideration of Rs.20,25,000. On the same date, Plaintiff paid Rs.1 lakh to the Defendant as earnest money in cash. The said payment was duly acknowledged by the Defendant by putting his signatures on the revenue stamp in the agreement executed by the Defendant.

3. The Plaintiff states that the Defendant also represented to the Plaintiff that he is the exclusive owner of the suit property and the same is free from mortgage and encumbrances. The Defendant undertook to execute the sale deed in favour of the Plaintiff on or before 30^th June 2005 in the office of the Sub Registrar, Delhi. It was agreed that the balance sale consideration of Rs.19,25,000 would be paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant in the Sub Registrar’s Office and vacant possession of the suit property would be handed over by the Defendant to the Plaintiff on the spot. In the second week of March 2005, the Defendant approached the Plaintiff asking him to complete the deal by March 2005 itself. The Plaintiff states that he immediately applied for a loan from HDFC Bank on 20^th March 2005 for a sum of Rs. 16 lakhs. The loan was sanctioned on 25^th March 2005 and a final disbursement advice was issued by HDFC Bank to the Plaintiff on 30^th March 2005. The Plaintiff also paid interest of Rs.596 for the month of March 2005. The Plaintiff states that the balance sale consideration was ready with the Plaintiff by the end of March 2005. The Plaintiff states that he also purchased stamp papers worth Rs.1,40,000 on 29^th March 2005 for the purposes of execution of the sale deed. He stated that although the agreed last date for execution of the sale deed was 30^th June 2005, the Plaintiff was ready with balance sale consideration of Rs.19,25,000 by the end of March 2005 itself.

4. The Plaintiff states that the Defendant, however, avoided receiving payment on one pretext or the other and demanded an additional sale consideration of Rs.5 lakhs on the ground that the property prices had gone up. Finding no alternative, Plaintiff issued a legal notice dated 18^th May 2005 calling upon him to complete the sale transaction. The Defendant is stated to have sent a reply stating that he did not have copy of the agreement and, therefore, could not reply to the legal notice. The Plaintiff sent a rejoinder on 3^rd June 2005 stating that he is still ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. The Plaintiff then filed the present suit for the aforementioned reliefs.

5. On 1^st July 2005 while directing summons in the suit and notice in the application, the Court restrained the Defendant from selling, transferring, alienating and