(S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta, JJ.)
Narender ________________________________________ Petitioner;
v.
Kundan Singh ____________________________________ Respondent.
Civil Appeal 156 of 2023 (@Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 10779/2022), decided on January 6, 2023
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Leave granted. With consent, the appeal was heard finally.
2. The appellant is aggrieved by an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. He was a decree holder of a conditional decree in a suit for specific performance. The agreement to sell in the present case was executed between the parties i.e. appellant and the respondent on 12.05.2006. The suit property ad-measures about 183.25 sq. yards and is located at Revenue Estate, Sohna, Tehsil Sohna, District Gurugram, Haryana.
3. In terms of the agreement, the agreed consideration was Rs. 5,000/- per sq. yard for the front portion of the property and Rs. 4,200/- per sq. yard for the back portion of the property. The suit was decreed by the Civil Judge, Gurugram on 03.04.2012. The materials on record show that in terms of the decree, the appellant had to deposit consideration within three months, which he failed to do. He, thereafter, moved the executing Court which declined to grant any relief on the ground that the terms of the decree had not been complied with. The appellant’s revision before the High Court failed.
4. It is a matter of record that the appellant had deposited the entire consideration i.e. Rs. 74,4,900/- before the Trial Court in the year 2019. In view of these facts the Court had issued notice to the respondent/judgment debtor.
5. Learned counsel for the judgment debtor did not dispute that the decree had become final and the plaintiff’s claim had been fully proved. He, however, submitted that the agreement could not have been acted upon in view of the inadequacy of the consideration. Alternatively, learned counsel submitted that in case the appellant deposits further compensation by way of additional interest, the respondent would be agreeable to executing the sale deed.
6. Having considered the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that since there is no dispute with respect to the finality of the decree, the failure on the part of the appellant to deposit the amount within time should not act so prejudicially as to rob him of his entitlement to the property. In these circumstances, the appellant/decree holder is directed to deposit an additional sum equivalent to 9% of the amount already deposited (Rs. 7,44,900/-) calculable from the date of agreement in question i.e. 12.05.2006 till 31.12.2022. This amount shall be deposited with the Trial Court within four weeks. Any amounts deposited by the appellant in the meanwhile (i.e. Rs. 5,00,000/- pursuant to the order of this Court) shall be adjusted towards such above additional sum payable. Upon ascertaining that these amounts have in fact been deposited, the Trial Court shall require the judgment debtor/respondent to execute the sale deed within a further period of two months.
7. The appeal is allowed in the above terms.
8. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
———
