Delhi High Court
Gold Cause Construction Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs Anand Prakash Gupta on 26 April, 2024
Author: C. Hari Shankar
Bench: C. Hari Shankar
$~32 & 33
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ EX.F.A. 51/2023 & CM APPL. 66249/2023, CM APPL.
24388/2024, CM APPL. 66251/2023
GOLD CAUSE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. & ANR.
..... Appellants
Through: Mr. Manav Gupta, Mr. Sahil
Garg, Mr. Abhinav Jain, Ms. Samiksha Jain,
Mr. Ankit Gupta, and Mr. Mithil Malhotra,
Advs.
versus
ANAND PRAKASH GUPTA ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Aryan Arora, Adv.
+ EX.F.A. 52/2023 & CM APPL. 66254/2023, CM APPL.
66256/2023, CM APPL. 18513/2024, CM APPL. 18514/2024,
CM APPL. 24389/2024
GOLD CAUSE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. & ANR.
..... Appellants
Through: Mr. Manav Gupta, Mr. Sahil
Garg, Mr. Abhinav Jain, Ms.Samiksha Jain,
Mr. Ankit Gupta, and Mr. Mithil Malhotra,
Advs.
versus
ANAND PRAKASH GUPTA ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Aryan Arora, Adv.
Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AJIT Digitally Signed
KUMAR EX.F.A. 51/2023 & EX.F.A. 52/2023 Page 1 of 6 By:CHANDRASHEKHARAN
HARI SHANKAR
Signing Date:29.04.2024 Signing Date:29.04.2024
18:51:59 18:50:44
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
ORDER
% 26.04.2024
CM APPL. 24388/2024 in EX.F.A. 51/2023
1. This is an application, filed by the respondent, seeking
condonation of delay is filing written argument.
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned.
The application is allowed.
CM APPL. 66251/2023 in EX.F.A. 51/2023
3. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing
Ex.F.A. 51/2023.
4. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned.
The application is allowed.
CM APPL. 66256/2023 in EX.F.A. 52/2023
5. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing
Ex.F.A. 52/2023.
6. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned.
The application is allowed.
Digitally Signed By:AJIT Digitally Signed
KUMAR EX.F.A. 51/2023 & EX.F.A. 52/2023 Page 2 of 6 By:CHANDRASHEKHARAN
HARI SHANKAR
Signing Date:29.04.2024 Signing Date:29.04.2024
18:51:59 18:50:44
CM APPL. 18514/2024 in EX.F.A. 52/2023
7. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
8. The application is disposed of.
CM APPL. 18513/2024 in EX.F.A. 52/2023
9. This is an application by the respondent for taking certain
additional documents on record.
10. Reserving his right to object to the validity of the documents
and their relevance in the present appeal, learned Counsel for the
appellant does not object the taking of the documents on record.
11. Accordingly, the documents are taken on record. The
application stands allowed accordingly.
EX.F.A. 51/2023 &
12. Mr. Manav Gupta, learned Counsel for the appellant, raises
various objections to the impugned order dated 25 August 2023
passed by the learned ADJ as the executing court dealing with Ex. P.
No. 98/2017 and Ex. P. No. 99/2017.
13. The executing court was executing judgment and decree dated
17 October 2012 passed by this Court in CS(OS) 231/2012 and
CS(OS) 232/2012 (Anand Prakash Gupta v. M/s Gold Cause
Digitally Signed By:AJIT Digitally Signed
KUMAR EX.F.A. 51/2023 & EX.F.A. 52/2023 Page 3 of 6 By:CHANDRASHEKHARAN
HARI SHANKAR
Signing Date:29.04.2024 Signing Date:29.04.2024
18:51:59 18:50:44
Constructions Pvt. Ltd.).
14. Paras 10 and 11 of the judgment dated 17 October 2012 of this
Court read thus:
"10. For the reasons stated hereinabove, I hold that the plaintiff
is entitled to specific performance of the agreements dated
16.05.2005 for sale of commercial space no. F-39 admeasuring
401.60 sq. ft. covered area equivalent to 617.85 sq. ft. super area
and commercial space No. F-40 admeasuring 414.31 sq. feet of
covered area equivalent to 637.39 sq. ft super area on the first floor
of Paradise Mall Plot no. 23, Shivaji Place, District Centre, Main
Ring Road, Raja Garden, New Delhi.
11. The plaintiff is directed to deposit the balance sale
consideration by way of a pay order/demand draft in the name of
Registrar General of this Court within two weeks from today. The
defendant shall thereafter execute the requisite document in favour
of the plaintiff within tour weeks of deposit of the balance sale
consideration under intimation to it and shall hand over peaceful
and vacant possession of the aforesaid commercial spaces to the
plaintiff. If the defendant does not con1ply with the order within
the tune stipulated above, the plaintiff shall be entitled to apply to
the court for appointment of a Local Commissioner to execute the
docun1ents on behalf of the defendant and for delive1y of
possession of commercial space No. F-39 and F-40 on the first
Floor of the Paradise Mall, Plot No. 23, Shivaji Place, District
Centre, Main Ring Road, Raja Garden, New Delhi to him. The
plaintiff shall also be entitled to costs of the suits.
Decree sheet be drawn accordingly."
15. It is not in dispute that, on the date when the impugned
judgment was passed by the learned ADJ as the executing court, the
shops which were earlier F-39 and F-40 were no longer bearing the
said numbers. It is also not in dispute that the shop numbers F-2 and
F-3 which were situated at the locations at which shop numbers F-39
and F-40 were earlier situated, were larger in area as compared to the
earlier shop numbers F-39 and F-40.
Digitally Signed By:AJIT Digitally Signed
KUMAR EX.F.A. 51/2023 & EX.F.A. 52/2023 Page 4 of 6 By:CHANDRASHEKHARAN
HARI SHANKAR
Signing Date:29.04.2024 Signing Date:29.04.2024
18:51:59 18:50:44
16. The appellant had, in these circumstances, pointed out that, as
the total area which was decreed in favour of the respondent
corresponded to only one of the two shops in respect of which the
decree was passed, the respondent could take possession of either one
of the two shops as per its choice. The respondent, however, insisted
that on being granted possession of both the shops. The respondent's
plea has been accepted by the learned ADJ in the impugned order.
17. It falls for consideration as to whether the learned ADJ could at
all have passed such an order especially when the judgment dated 17
October 2012 was not only shop number but also shop area specific.
It is also not in dispute that the agreement to sell, of which specific
performance was directed by this Court by the judgment dated 17
October 2012, was also not merely shop number, but also shop area
specific.
18. Mr. Manav Gupta submits that the learned executing court has
seriously exceeded its jurisdiction in directing handing over of
possession of shops number F-2 and F-3 to the respondent.
19. It is further submitted that, in fact, the total area of shop number
F-2 and F-3 would be nearly double the area which was decreed in
favour of the respondent by this Court on 17 October 2012.
20. Mr. Arun Arora, learned Counsel for the respondent seeks some
Digitally Signed By:AJIT Digitally Signed
KUMAR EX.F.A. 51/2023 & EX.F.A. 52/2023 Page 5 of 6 By:CHANDRASHEKHARAN
HARI SHANKAR
Signing Date:29.04.2024 Signing Date:29.04.2024
18:51:59 18:50:44
time to examine this issue.
21. Re-notify on 3 May 2024 for disposal.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
APRIL 26, 2024
dsn
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
Digitally Signed By:AJIT Digitally Signed
KUMAR EX.F.A. 51/2023 & EX.F.A. 52/2023 Page 6 of 6 By:CHANDRASHEKHARAN
HARI SHANKAR
Signing Date:29.04.2024 Signing Date:29.04.2024
18:51:59 18:50:44
