MANABENDRA SHAH Vs. GOPAL DAS ESTATES AND HOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common Order, I shall be disposing of IA. 5547/98 in Suit No. 1528/95 and IA. 5548/98 in Suit No. 1529/95, moved by the plaintiffs under Order XII Rule 6 for a decree on admission. Both these applications are being taken up for disposal by this common order since the facts and issues involved are common.

(2.) For the sake of convenience the facts of Suit No. 1528/95 are being considered in this application. The plaintiff's case is that in the year 1977, it entered into an agreement to purchase flat Nos. 11 and 12 admeasuring 1418 sq.fts situated on the second floor of Gopal Das Verma Bhawan, 28 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. The plaintiff claims to have paid 82.5% of the sale consideration during the period 14.6.1977 to January, 1985. Plaintiff further claims that on 21.6.1995, he sent a further cheque of Rs. 1,06,350.00 . The defendants, it is urged, have turned dishonest and are not completing the sale transaction despite the plaintiff being ready and willing to do so.

(3.) The present application is primarily based on the plaintiff's submission that there could not be a unilateral recission of the contract by the defendants and any such repudiation which gives rise to recission of contract under Section 62 of the Contract Act, should be a bilateral act. the precise submission is that in this case the defendants at best can claim that they had unilaterally terminated and cancelled the arrangement vide their letter dated 20.11.1986. Such a cancellation would be bad at law and of no legal effect. This being the main defence taken by the defendant in its written statement, learned counsel for plaintiff urges that plaintiff is entitled to have a decree passed under Order XII Rule 6 for specific performance of the contract.