Dismissed

Naseeru & Ors. v. Jarifa & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Dec 2015CR/7725/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed a revision petition against an order allowing withdrawal of a suit where the claim for specific performance was time-barred. The court held that no grievance existed as the agreement was deemed forfeited and liberty to file fresh suits was not availed.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition dismissed with liberty to proceed with counter claim if aggrieved.

Naseeru & Ors. Vs Jarifa & Ors. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

CR No.7725 of 2014 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CR No.7725 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.12.2015

Naseeru and others

... Petitioners

Vs.

Jarifa and others

... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶11

Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment?

¶12

To be referred to reporters or not?

¶13

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

Present:Mr. Sanjay Verma, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶15

Mr. Robin Dutt, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 6.

¶16

AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral)

¶17

The petitioner-defendants are aggrieved of the order dated 14.10.2014 (Annexure P-4) granting permission to the respondent-plaintiffs to withdraw the suit with liberty to file fresh one in accordance with law.

¶18

Mr. Sanjay Verma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-defendants submits that in a suit for declaration claiming ownership and possession on the basis of the agreement to sell dated 07.02.1997, counter claim challenging the execution of the agreement was also set up/filed. He further submits that respondentplaintiffs withdrew the suit after seeking permission of the Court. Even permission sought has not been availed of and the suit, if any,

¶19

SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2015.12.22 13:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶20

CR No.7725 of 2014 (O&M)

¶21

¶22

seeking specific performance was time barred. In fact, there was no defect, much less, any inherent defect, therefore, permission could not have been granted.

¶23

Mr. Robin Dutt, learned counsel for the respondentplaintiffs submits that there is no illegality and perversity in the order under challenge as suit framed and filed was not maintainable and the remedy, if any, was to seek specific performance of the agreement to sell. Since the counter claim is independent suit, there will be no bar to the petitioner-defendants to continue with the counter claim and rightly so, the trial Court had fixed the hearing of the counter claim for evidence of counter claimant.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book.

¶25

It is a matter of record that liberty, so granted, has not been availed of till date. In essence, agreement to sell has become enforceable in the eyes of law. The petitioner-defendants have no grievance as the claim purported to have been mentioned in agreement to sell deemed to have been forfeited. In essence, the respondent-plaintiffs have lost the right to seek specific performance. In case, the petitioner-defendants are still aggrieved, they are at liberty to proceed with the counter claim.

¶26

Keeping in view the aforementioned observations, I do not intend to differ with the impugned order and the same cannot be said to have been passed without jurisdiction.

¶27

SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2015.12.22 13:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶28

CR No.7725 of 2014 (O&M)

¶29

¶30

Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.

¶31

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE

¶32

December 14, 2015 savita

¶33

SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2015.12.22 13:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Naseeru & Ors. v. Jarifa & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naseeru & Ors. v. Jarifa & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajinder Singh Vs Punjab State Electricity Board & Anr.

Parveen Kumar Vs Vijaya Bank & Ors.

Som Dutt Vs Chander Mohan and Ors.

Kavita Vs Abhishek Bhandari

Naresh Vs Rajni

Jasmir Singh Vs Bhajan Kaur and Others