Smt. Veena Mahajan vs Sh. V.N. Verma And Ors. on 31 March, 2016

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA
MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
%
1. The appellant Decree Holder is aggrieved by the order of a learned
Single Judge staying execution proceedings, till decision in a suit, i.e.
CS(OS) 779/2001 is rendered.

2. The Decree Holder had entered into an agreement with the original
owner of the property, first respondent in these proceedings (hereafter called
“Verma”), on 14.02.1986. He filed a suit on 11.03.1988, claiming specific
performance of that agreement to sell. Before the filing of the suit, another
agreement to sell was entered between Verma and one Kamlesh Gupta. The
suit filed by the Decree Holder for Specific Performance was allowed and
decreed in full on 29.04.1998. In the meanwhile, it is alleged that on
27.11.1990 yet another agreement to sell the same property was entered into

EFA(OS) 5/2014, C.M. APPL.3319/2014 Page 1
between Kamlesh Gupta and the second and third respondents (i.e. Meena
Rani and Nalini Gupta), alleged vendee during pendency of the Decree
Holder’s suit. It was alleged that the property was handed over to them; and
that they constructed a boundary sometime in 1998. The agreement to sell-
dated 27.11.1990 entered into between Kamlesh Gupta and the said two
respondents also contained an endorsement by the first respondent Verma.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply

*