Sh. Subhash Chander Kathuria vs Sh. Umed Singh And Anr.
2006 Latest Caselaw 569 Del

JUDGMENT

Vijender Jain, J.

Caveat No.29/2006

Notice discharged.

RFA(OS) No.23/2006 & CM Nos.4502 & 4503/2006

1. The appellant in this appeal is aggrieved by an order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 24.1.2006 dismissing his suit for specific performance as barred by limitation.

2. The appellant had entered into an Agreement with the respondents on 27.7.1988 whereby the respondents had agreed to sell to the appellant their agricultural land measuring 34 bighas 1 biswas in Village Bamnauli, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi, for consideration of Rs. 20,92,656/-. Rs. 2 lacs was paid by the appellant to the respondents as earnest money and the balance sale amount was to be paid at the time of registration of the Sale Deed. It was stipulated in the Agreement to Sell that the respondents were to obtain No Objection Certificate from the revenue authorities and Income-tax clearance Certificate from the Income-tax Department before execution of the Sale Deed which was agreed to be executed within three months of the Agreement. After entering into an Agreement and payment of earnest money of Rs. 2 lacs, neither the appellant nor the respondents pursued the matter thereafter till August, 1996. However, on 13.9.1996, the respondents asked the appellant to pay an additional amount of Rs. 20,000/- for getting No Objection Certificate and Income-tax Clearance Certificate from the concerned authorities. As the transaction of sale pursuant to Agreement to Sell dated 27.7.1988 was not completed, the appellant filed a suit for specific performance, possession and permanent injunction in respect of the property agreed to be purchased vide the aforesaid Agreement and the said suit was filed by him on 16.2.1999.

3. As per Article 54 contained in the First Schedule of the Limitation Act, 1963, the limitation for filing suit for specific performance of an Agreement to Sell is three years from the date of cause of action. In this case, the Agreement to Sell was entered into between the parties on 27.7.1988 whereas the suit which has been dismissed vide impugned order was filed on 16.2.1999, that is, after about 11 years of the date of the Agreement.

4. The suit has been dismissed as barred by limitation by the learned Single Judge vide impugned judgment. The contention of Mr. Rajiv Nayar, learned senior counsel for the appellant, is that the limitation of three years is to be reckoned from the date when the respondents acknowledged their liability to execute the Sale Deed vide letter dated 13.9.1996 because according to him it was necessary for the respondents to have obtained No Objection Certificate from the revenue authorities and Income-tax Clearance Certificate from the Income-tax Department before the Sale Deed could be executed in favor of the appellant. This argument advanced on behalf of the appellant, in our view, has no substance. Article 54 of the Limitation Act prescribes a period of three years from the date of cause of action for filing a suit for specific performance, in the event of breach of the Agreement committed by the other party.

5. The Agreement to Sell dated 27.7.1988 executed between the parties clearly stipulates that the Sale Deed was to be executed by the respondents in favor of the appellant within three months of the Agreement after obtaining No Objection Certificate from the revenue authorities and Income-tax Clearance Certificate from the Income-tax department. The limitation for filing of suit for enforcement of the aforesaid Agreement expired on 27.10.1991 and, therefore, in our opinion, the learned Single Judge was absolutely right in holding that the suit filed by the appellant on 16.2.1999 is hopelessly barred by limitation.

6. We find no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order of the learned Single Judge which requires our interference in exercise of appellate jurisdiction.

7. This appeal is without any merit and is hereby dismissed.