Delhi High Court
Sh. Swadesh Sharma vs Sh. Vikas Sharma & Others on 3 February, 2015
Author: S. P. Garg
$~24
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY 03, 2015.
+ CS(OS) 201/2007 & IA No.10759/2011 ( u/O 6 R 17 CPC)
SH. SWADESH SHARMA
..... Plaintiff
Through : Mr.Vishal Khattar, Advocate.
VERSUS
SH. VIKAS SHARMA & OTHERS
..... Defendants
Through : Mr.Anil Kumar Bhasin, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
S.P.GARG, J.
OA No.156/2014 (u/R 4 C II)
1. Present Chamber appeal has been preferred against the order dated
2.8.2014 passed by the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) by which
application filed by the plaintiff under Order VII Rule 14 CPC to place on
record certain additional documents was dismissed. The appeal is contested
by the defendant.
2. It is a matter on record that the plaintiff has instituted the instant suit
for specific performance of Agreement to Sell dated 13.03.2005. It is
averred that a sum of `15,98,000/- was paid to the defendant as part sale
consideration. The plaintiff expressed readiness and willingness to
perform his part of the contract and to pay the balance consideration.
Issues were settled by an order dated 15.01.2009. The plaintiff filed his
evidence by way of affidavit but no cross-examination took place.
Apparently, the plaintiff and his witnesses are in the process of
examination.
3. IA No.10758/2014 under Order VII Rule 14 CPC was moved by the
plaintiff to bring on record additional documents to prove that he had
enough money at his disposal in bank accounts to pay it to the seller before
the due date. These documents could not be placed on record earlier by the
previous counsel. When the plaintiff engaged a new counsel, this lapse
came to his knowledge.
4. Learned counsel for the defendant urged that no valid reasons have
been given for not filing the documents at the relevant time. These
documents do not reflect if the plaintiff was having sufficient funds to pay
the balance consideration to the seller on due date.
5. In the plaint it was specifically averred that the plaintiff was always
ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and to pay the balance
sale consideration. He had requested the defendants to intimate the date
and time for the payment of balance consideration but the defendant did not
come forward. Additional documents which he intends to place on record
are to prove specific issue, the burden of which has been placed upon him
to show that he was financially capable to pay the balance sale
consideration before the due date. These documents are primarily the bank
account of the plaintiff and that of his wife in various banks and fixed
deposits in their name. There is least possibility of the documents to be
fabricated or manufactured subsequently. These documents, prima facie,
show as to how much amount was in the credit of the plaintiff and his wife
in November, 2006. In my view, all these documents are necessary and
relevant for determination of the real dispute between the parties. For delay
in filing the documents, the defendants can be compensated with costs.
6. In the light of the above discussion, OA filed by the plaintiff is
allowed. The additional documents are ordered to be taken on record
subject to cost of `10,000/-.
7. The OA stands disposed of.
CS(OS) 201/2007 & IA No.10759/2011 ( u/O 6 R 17 CPC)
8. Relist before the Roster Bench on 10.02.2015.
(S.P.GARG)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 03, 2015
sa
