21. Before I record my answers to the questions of law formulated while admitting the Appeal, it would be necessary to take into consideration the submissions canvassed by Mr. Nikam that the conduct of Appellant/Defendant has been such that no relief can be granted to him. The admitted position is that the Appellant agreed to purchase Flat No.302, admeasuring 784 sq.ft in Balraj building ‘A’ for total consideration of Rs.34,50,000/- in addition to further payment of Rs.3,00,000/- towards MSEB charges and development charges. Thus, under the Agreement, total amount due and payable by the Defendant to the Plaintiff is Rs.37,50,000/-. It appears that the Defendant has paid to Plaintiff by way of cheque only Rs.7,50,000/-. Though Defendant claims payment of further amount of Rs.25,00,000/- in cash, this is something which needs to be established by him before the Trial Court. As of now, there is no material to draw inference that Rs. 25,00,000/- is also paid by the Defendant to Plaintiff. However, Defendant has taken possession of the flat in the year 2017 and has been residing therein since then. It is Plaintiff’s case that by paying paltry sum of Rs.7,50,000/-, Defendant is enjoying possession of the flat for last seven long years. Defendant does not dispute that he has taken over possession of the flat and has been residing therein. If this is the position, till the Defendant establishes his defences in respect of alleged unauthorised construction by Plaintiff, he cannot be permitted to occupy flat free of cost. Defendant has already deposited an amount of
