- (1.) This order shall dispose of two appeals bearing SAO Nos.63 and 65 of 2014 being inter-connected. However, the facts are being extracted from SAO No.63 of 2014.
(2.) In both the cases, the Appellate Court has remanded the case to the trial Court, allowing the application for impleadment, granting permission to file written statement and after framing proper issues and affording sufficient opportunities to the parties to lead evidence, to decide the suit afresh.
(3.) The facts emerging from the impugned order are that the plaintiff-appellant Hitesh Kumar Sawhney is alleged to have purchased a plot/show room no.399 in Scheme No.34, Mugal Canal, Karnal in an open auction held on 17.04.2001 by the Karnal Improvement Trust (here-in-after referred to as the "Trust"). It is alleged that originally one Karambir gave the highest bid of Rs. 18,20,000/- but at the fall of the hammer, the said Karambir was not found at the place of auction till the end and the amount of Rs. 20,000/- was also not found deposited by said Karambir for taking part in the said auction. Thereafter, the officials of the Trust offered to purchase the said plot by giving Rs. 5,000/- extra bid i.e. total bid of Rs. 18,25,000/- for which the plaintiff agreed and handed over a cheque amounting to Rs. 1,82,500/- to the Trust and as he was short of money, borrowed a sum of Rs. 40,000/- from Devender Kumar Anand. After the auction, the plaintiff went to collect receipt of the cheque but it was found to have been issued in the name of Devender Kumar Anand and despite several letters written by the plaintiff, the Trust rejected the claim of the plaintiff vide its order dated 28.06.2001. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed suit for mandatory injunction for refund of 10% amount deposited by him with interest or in the alternative sought declaration of ownership of the suit property. The case of the plaintiff was that he was present at the time of auction, was the highest bidder and since he had paid 10% of the bid amount, therefore, he had become the owner of the suit property. The said suit was decreed on 27.11.2010 with the following orders:- "the suit of the plaintiff succeeds and same is hereby decreed with no order as to costs. The defendant No.3 is hereby directed to issue a receipt and allotment letter with respect of Plot No.399 or other plot. Decreesheet be drawn accordingly and file be consigned to record after due compliance".;