JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Appellant, a Limited Company, entered into an agreement
to sell (Ex.PW-1/2) dated 01.01.1983 with respondent No.1, a
Private Limited Company for sale of property bearing Municipal
No.23 Plot No.172 Jor Bagh, New Delhi comprising a lease-hold
tenure in the land and a building constructed thereon at a sale
price of Rs. 41,50,000/- acknowledging having received Rs. 50,000/-
on the date of the agreement towards sale consideration, also
recording that by means of cheques the appellant had paid to
respondent No.1 a total sum of Rs. 11 lakhs towards earnest
money-cum-part sale consideration on September 02, 1982
and November 08, 1982. It stands recorded in the agreement
that respondent No.1 had obtained a loan in sum of Rs. 20 lakhs
from Punjab & Sind Bank and by way of equitable mortgage
had pledged the title deed of the property with the bank and
that as on the date of the agreement the amount outstanding
and payable to the bank was Rs. 24,50,000/-. The agreement
records that the appellant would clear the liability of the bank.
The agreement records that respondent No.1 would obtain the
necessary permissions from Land & Development Office and
the Income Tax Authorities as required by Section 230-A and
Section 269-AB of the Income Tax Act. It records that if any
other permission was required, the same would be obtained.
The agreement records that all permissions would be obtained
within 6 months and thereafter the sale deed would be
executed upon appellant paying to respondent No.1 the
balance sale consideration. Possession of the property was
handed over to the appellant.
(2.) Before the six months time expired, on February 01,
1983, at the asking of respondent No.1 the appellant gave Rs. 5
lakhs to respondent No.1 to be paid to Punjab & Sind Bank and
on February 10, 1983, once again, at the asking of respondent
No.1 the appellant gave Rs. 2.5 lakhs to respondent No.1 to be
paid to Punjab & Sind Bank. Needless to state, these payments
had not to be adjusted against the sale consideration since
appellant had to clear the mortgage as per Ex.PW-1/2.
(3.) On May 26, 1983 appellant issued a legal notice Ex.PW-
1/15 calling upon respondent No.1 to produce, after obtaining,
the sale permissions envisaged by the agreement to sell and
receive balance sale consideration and simultaneously execute
the sale deed. Vide letter dated June 30, 1983, Ex.PW-1/16,
respondent No.2 wrote on behalf of respondent No.1 being its
Director, that further time be granted to it to obtain the
necessary permissions. Vide supplementary agreement Ex.PW-
1/17 dated July 07, 1983 the parties mutually extended time for
completion of the sale transaction till October 31, 1983. The
said date lapsed. Neither respondent No.1 obtained the
necessary sale permissions; and nor there is any evidence that
it ever applied for any sale permission and the parties
executed another extension agreement dated November 17,
1983, Ex.PW-1/18, extending time till January 31, 1984 to
complete the sale. Even said date lapsed. Another agreement
dated February 06, 1984, Ex.PW-1/19, was executed extending
time to complete the sale till April 07, 1984. Even said date
lapsed and the parties executed yet another agreement dated
April 16, 1984, Ex.PW-1/20, extending time to complete the
sale by September 30, 1984. Even said date reached and on
September 30, 1984, Ex.PW-1/21 was executed extending time
to complete the sale by December 31, 1984 and three days
prior thereto on December 28, 1984, the parties executed
Ex.PW-1/22 extending time to complete the sale by March 31,
1985. Said date reached and on March 31, 1985 vide Ex.PW-
1/23 the parties extended the time to complete the sale by
September 30, 1985. Six days prior, on September 24, 1985,
parties executed Ex.PW-1/24 recording that the sale would be
completed by March 31, 1986 and three days prior thereto on
March 28, 1986, parties executed Ex.PW-1/25 recording time
being extended till September 30, 1986. Four days prior on
September 26, 1986, vide Ex.PW-1/26, the time was extended
till September 30, 1987 and in the meanwhile a further sum of
Rs. 2.5 lakhs was paid by the appellant to Punjab & Sind Bank to
be adjusted against the amount overdue and payable by
respondent No.1.;