कोर्ट क्या करती है जब DDA अलॉटेड फ्लैट का विक्रेता बईमान हो जाय? (December, 2022) скачать в хорошем качестве

कोर्ट क्या करती है जब DDA अलॉटेड फ्लैट का विक्रेता बईमान हो जाय? (December, 2022)

#Suit_for_Specific_performance #Sale_of_flat #delhi_high_court #DDA Better legal information to enrich your legal outlook. Legal discussion to improve your legal understanding. CONTENTS OF THE VIDEO Naveen Gupta vs Bharat Lal Meena & Anr on 15 May, 2018 JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Argument of Bharat Meena/seller that: As per Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, any transaction to constitute sale, a registered document needs to be executed. The contract is hit by Section 23 and Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, as the sale or transfer of the allotted flat is forbidden by the policy of DDA. LET US SEE HOW THE HIGH COURT BALANCED THE NEED OF JUSTICE High Court noted that as per the demand letter there was Automatic cancellation, if initial deposit is not paid in time. The allottees had no money so they enter into an agreement to avoid cancellation and now they turned dishonest. Important points: 1. From agreement, it is clear that the possession was not handed over at the time of the agreement to sell. 2. The transaction was not a sale as contemplated under clause 19 of the DDA Housing Scheme, 2006. 3. It was merely an agreement by which the parties had agreed upon the terms for future obligations. The sellers/allottees were to execute the requisite deed and hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the flat. 4. The agreement to sell does not constitute sale as no possession was handed over and the agreement was also not registered. Thus, under the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, the transaction did not constitute a sale/transfer. 5. The clauses of the scheme were well within the knowledge of the Sellers/allottees. High Court held that Buyer/Naveen Gupta is entitled to the relief of specific performance. But considering that he would have to undergo further formalities with DDA for transfer of ownership, so he is held entitled to enhanced compensation as he has paid more then 95 % of the agreement amount. The market value of the property would be much higher. It is the settled law that in a suit for specific performance, the Court can either grant specific performance of the contract or grant compensation/damages in lieu thereof. Meena was directed to pay Navin Gupta a sum of Rs.76 lakhs which is double the amount paid by the Plaintiff, along with simple interest @ 12% p.a. from 20th July, 2007 till the date of payment.