$~51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 71/2026 HEM RAJ BHATI .....Plaintiff Through: Ms. Munish Chhoker and Ms. Jyoti Verma, Advs.

versus MOHD MUZAMMIL @MUZAMMIL KHAN & ORS.

.....Defendants Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 23.01.2026 CS(OS) 71/2026

1. The plaint be registered as suit.

2. On filing of process fee, summons be issued to the defendants by all permissible modes.

3. The summons shall indicate that written statement must be filed within thirty days from the date of receipt of summons. The defendants shall also file an affidavit of admission/denial of the documents filed by the plaintiff, failing which the written statement shall not be taken on record.

4. The plaintiff is at liberty to file replication thereto within thirty days after filing of the written statement. The replication shall be accompanied by affidavit of admission/denial in respect of the documents filed by the defendants, failing which the replication shall not be taken on record.

5. It is made clear that any unjustified denial of documents may lead to an order of costs against the concerned party.

6. Any party seeking inspection of documents may do so in accordance with the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.

7. List before the learned Joint Registrar for completion of service, pleadings, admission/denial of documents and marking of exhibits on

06.04.2026.

I.A. 1968/2026 (under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 r/w Section 151 CPC)

8. The present suit has been filed seeking specific performance of the Agreement to Sell dated 26.05.2024 and 24.12.2024 with regard to the property bearing no. S-514,School Block, Shakarpur Khas, Shakarpur, Delhi-110092.

9. The case set out in the present petition is that defendants nos. 1 to 3 are the owner of the suit property in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 29.05.2015 which was arrived at before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.

10. Attention of the Court is drawn to the said settlement wherein it has been recorded that defendant nos. 1 to 3 will get 100 sq. yds (three side open) property bearing no. S-514, out of the plot measuring 200 sq. Yds situated at School Block, Shakarpur, Delhi -110092 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the suit property’) and the balance 100 sq. Yds would go to other three brothers of the defendants.

11. It is also mentioned in the said settlement that defendant nos. 4 and 5 who are sisters of defendant nos. 1 to 3 will jointly get Rs. 25 lacs in lieu of their share in the suit property.

12. Based on the said settlement Agreement dated 29.05.2016, defendant nos. 1 to 3 entered into an agreement to sell dated 26.05.2024 [in short, ‘First ATS’] with the plaintiff for the sale of suit property for a total consideration of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- only. The plaintiff paid an amount of Rs.

11 lacs at the time of execution of said agreement.

13. Thereafter, certain more payments were made and fresh agreement to sell dated 24.12.2024 (in short, ‘Second ATS’) was executed between the plaintiff and defendant nos. 1 to 4 wherein the said defendants acknowledged earlier payments to the extent of Rs. 61 lacs.

14. Clause 3 of the Second ATS shows that the balance amount payable by the plaintiff to defendant nos. 1 to 3 was Rs.1,39,00,000/- and the same was to be paid on or before 23.11.2025 when defendant nos. 1 to 3 would simultaneouslyexecute the sale deed.

15. Ms. Munish Chhoker, learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that even after the execution of Second ATS, the plaintiff paid further amount of Rs. 2 lacs to defendant nos. 4 to 5 which has been acknowledged by them. Such acknowledgment has been placed as Document 8 along with the plaint. 16. He submits that before the cut-off date of 23.11.2025, the plaintiff sent a legal notice dated 08.10.2025 calling upon the defendants to execute the sale deed and accept the balance payment of Rs. 1.37 crores which was readilyavailable with the plaintiff.

17. The same request was reiterated by the petitioner vide anoth