Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: Judgment ..1..
S.C. Suit No.994 of 2020
MHCC010024352020
Exh.9
Lodged on : 26.02.2020
Registered on : 04.03.2020
Decided on : 07.01.2023
Duration : 02Y 10M 12D
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
S.C. SUIT NO. 994 OF 2020
Mrs. Afsana Mohd. Kaisar Ansari.
Age : 49 years, Occ: Housewife,
Residing at Room No.7, 4th floor,
Plot No.268/270, Jumma Masjid,
Jahangir Boman Behram Marg,
Madanpura, Mumbai Central,
Mumbai 400 008. ...Plaintiff.
Versus
Rizwan M. Dadan
Occ: Developer,
carrying on business in the name and
style of Royal Realtors, having their
principal place of business at 103,
Safa Tower, R. B. Marg, Noor Baug,
Dongri, Mumbai 400 009. ...Defendant.
Appearance
Adv. S.K. Chaurasia for plaintiff.
Defendant ex-parte.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
R.R. Patare
(COURT No.: 2)
DATED : 7th January, 2023.
-- 1 of 5 --
Judgment ..2..
S.C. Suit No.994 of 2020
J U D G M E N T
This suit is filed for decree of specific performance of contract
under the provisions of MOFA.
2. Brief facts of the plaintiff’s case are as under :-
The plaintiff was in search of residential premises. The plaintiff
approached the defendant through one Shahzad and Pappubhai.
Negotiation took place between the plaintiff and defendant. Accordingly
the plaintiff and defendant settled the terms of contract for sale of suit
flat including the price of suit flat at Rs. 45,00,000/-. Accordingly, the
defendant executed registered document of agreement for sale in favour
of plaintiff. The plaintiff has paid entire consideration amount to the
defendant. Accordingly defendant issued receipt in favour of plaintiff in
respect of payment made by the plaintiff. It is alleged that the defendant
has committed breach of agreement. It is further alleged that defendant
failed to deliver possession of suit flat to plaintiff in terms of agreement.
Hence this suit.
3. The defendant was duly served with writ of summons. However
he remains absent. Hence this suit proceeded ex-parte against the
defendant.
4. From the above peculiar facts and circumstances following points
are framed for decision of suit and I answered the same for the
following reasons.
Sr.
No.
POINTS FINDINGS
1. Whether plaintiff proves execution of
agreement for sale dated 12.05.2017
by the defendant in her favour as
claimed ? In the affirmative.
-- 2 of 5 --
Judgment ..3..
S.C. Suit No.994 of 2020
2. Whether agreement for sale dated
12.05.2017 is valid and binding on
defendant ? In the affirmative.
3. Whether plaintiff proves that defendant
has committed breach of agreement ?
In the affirmative.
4. Whether plaintiff is entitled to get
possession of suit flat ?
In the affirmative.
5. Whether plaintiff is entitled to get relief
of declaration as claimed ?
In the affirmative.
6. What order and decree? As per final order.
R E A S O N S
AS TO POINT NO.1 TO 5:-
5. It is the case of plaintiff that after negotiation between herself
and defendant agreement for sale of flat no.1003 admeasuring about
300 sq. ft. (carpet area) situated at ‘Royal Touch’ previously known as
‘Maryambai Building’ situated at CS No.1773 of Byculla Division,
Byculla (W), Mumbai for consideration of Rs.45,00,000/-. The plaintiff
paid entire consideration amount to the defendant, however, defendant
did not deliver possession of suit flat in terms of agreement. The
plaintiff has produced on record agreement alleged to have been
executed between herself and defendant on record at Exh.4. The
agreement Exh.4 dated 12.05.2017 is registered document. Clause 4 of
the agreement dealing with description of flat to be sold in favour of
plaintiff. Clause 6 dealing with the price settled between the parties of
flat to be sold in favour of plaintiff. Clause 13 dealing with the date on
which possession was to be handed over to the plaintiff by the
defendant. The receipt regarding payment made by the plaintiff to the
defendant towards consideration amount is also annexed alongwith
agreement Exh.4. From the documentary evidence on record it is seen
that the defendant has agreed to sell flat no.1003 admeasuring about
300 sq. ft. (carpet area) situated on 10th floor of building known as
-- 3 of 5 --
Judgment ..4..
S.C. Suit No.994 of 2020
‘Royal Touch’ for consideration of Rs.45,00,000/-. The documentary
evidence further shows that entire consideration amount came to be
paid the defendant by the plaintiff.
6. In addition to the documentary evidence the plaintiff also led oral
evidence by way of affidavit at Exh.2. The oral evidence of plaintiff gets
support from the documentary evidence on record. The oral and
documentary evidence on record has gone unchallenged. There is no
reason to discard the same. In such circumstances, it is hereby held that
the agreement executed between the plaintiff and defendant is valid
and binding on defendant. Plaintiff is entitled to get possession of suit
flat in terms of agreement at Exh.4. In the result, point no.1 to 5 are
answered in the affirmative and following order is passed.
ORDER
1. Suit No.994 of 2020 is hereby decreed with costs in the following
terms:-
a) It is hereby declared that agreement for sale dated 12.05.2017
executed between plaintiff and defendant is valid and binding on
defendant.
b) The defendant do put plaintiff in possession of suit flat
specifically described in plaint para 5 after obtaining necessary
certificates required under the Law from concerned Authority.
2. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(R.R. Patare)
Judge
City Civil Court, Gr.Mumbai
Date : 07.01.2023
Typed on : 07.01.2023
HHJ signed on : 07.01.2023
-- 4 of 5 --
Judgment ..5..
S.C. Suit No.994 of 2020
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
DATED 07.01.2023, 5.30 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME Mrs. V. N. Rajgole.
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
H.H.J. Shri. R.R. Patare.
C.R.No.02
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
07.01.2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
07.01.2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 07.01.2023
-- 5 of 5 --