IA No. 932/2009 in CS(OS) No. 176/2007

Page 1 of 5

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of Reserve: 23.10.2009

Date of Order: November 11, 2009

IA No. 932/2009 in CS(OS) No. 176/2007

%

11.11.2009

Sobhag Narain Mathur

... Plaintiff

Through: Mr. Arjun Harkauli, Advocate

Versus

Pragya Agrawal & Ors.

... Defendants

Through: Mr. Deshraj, Advocate &

Mr. D.K.Kaushik, Advocate

JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

Yes.

2. To be referred to the reporter or not?

Yes.

3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?

Yes.

ORDER

By this application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, the applicant/defendant

has sought rejection of the suit on the ground that no cause of action had been disclosed

by the plaintiff for specific performance of the alleged contract. The contract relied upon

by the plaintiff was merely a contract for entering into a further agreement and the Court

could not compel the parties to enter into an agreement to sell.

2.

Before dealing with further averments made by the applicant, it would be

fruitful to reproduce the contract which is the basis of this suit.