AJAI JOHRI Vs. SHINGHAL LAND AND FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED
LAWS(DLH)-1983-8-1
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on August 08,1983

AJAI JOHN Appellant
VERSUS
SHINGHAL LAND AND FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

PANCHSHEEL COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. RANWA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-10-123] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

D.R.Khanna,J. - (1.)Singhal Land and Finance Pvt. Ltd. was incorporated in 1962 with authorised capital of rupees two lacs. Its paid capital has been Rs. 1,10,500.00 . It has been claiming to effect purchase of land at different places, develop them into plots and sell them. One such colony said to have been developed was "Vijay Park" in village Pavi-Sadiquepur Pargana Loni, Tehsil and District Ghaziabad. Wide publicity for sale of plots in this colony, was given, and a result about 500 plots sold to different persons.
(2.)The five petitioners who have moved the present petition under Section 433.439 of the Companies Act, 1956, were similarly sold six plots as detailed in para 6 of the petition. The price charged from each of the petitioners Nos. 1,2 and 4 was Rs. 3,000.00 , and from petitioners Nos.3 and 5, Rs. 4,000.00 each Another plot was sold to petitioner No. 6 for Rs. 6,000.00 . Five of these sales were in 1968, and the sixth in favour of petitioner No. in 1970. These plots were described in the sale-deeds as forming part of khasra No. 476 of that village. It was further represented in the sale-deed as under:-
"That the vendor assures the vendee that they are the absolute owners of the land and the plot is free from all encumbrances whatsoever. The vendor further assures the vendee that in the event of any flaw in the title of the vendor the property sold shall pass out from the ownership or possession of the vendee, the vendor shall be held responsible to compensate the vendor in all respects. That the vendor has put dthe vendee into actual physical possession of the plot of land. That the vendee shall take all steps to get his name mutated inhe revenue records and do the necessary expenses himself to which the vendor shall have no objection."

(3.)The case of the petitioners is that the respondent-company had been assuring transfer of land in their favour by the process of mutation in the revenue record and taking up the matter with the revenue authorities. However, as the time passed, it gradually became clear to the petitioners that they had been cheated and defrauded, and the respondent was avoiding on one pretext or the other to get the land mutated in their favour. All that was shown to the petitioners was a sign-board fixed at a place in Ghaziabad with the name 'Vijay Park', and this was how the sale of the plots was effected in their favour. No development of plots actually existed. The enquiries later revealed that the company had itself no title over the land, and as such entirely misrepresented that it was the absolute owner of the land. It was further revealed that the land had come under consolidation and was irrigated, and as such there was no possibility of building any house there The petitioners demanded proof of ownership of the land from the respondent-company, and also the plan of the developed khasra No. 476. None of them was supplied by the company.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.