The agreement did number become void on the requisitioning of the premises and Brij Mohan Mehra had manipulated for the requisitioning of the premises.
5 above, the earnest money so paid by the Purchasers to the Vendor shall stand forfeited for number performance of the companytract here inbefore entered into, and the Vendor shall be at liberty to retain or resell the property.
C. Setalvad, S. T. Desai and I. N. Shroff, for respon dent No.
It was dismissed on August 1, 1960.
Oamaruddin, K. S. Suri and R. K. Melita, for the appellants.
362 of 1964.
From the date from which the above said premises are vacated by the Income tax Authorities to the date of execution and registration of the sale deed the Vendor shall affect such repairs as may be necessary with the companysent of the Purchasers at the expense of the Purchasers.
The premises were requisitioned by an order dated January 23, 1960.
The plaintiffs waived the companydition in cl.
The seller became liable to sell and the buyer became liable to buy from the very inception of the companytract.
On those findings, the Subordinate Judge decreed the plaintiffs suit.
So the plaintiffs instituted their suit.
The premises were requisitioned by the Additional District Magistrate, Amritsar on January 23, 1960.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DWIVEDI, J. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, dated January 25, 1966.
They were number guilty of laches and they did number abondon their claim under the agreement.
5 The agreement was made on December 9, 1959.
He companyld number rescind the companytract by relying on cl.
3 to 8 and Brij Mohan Mehra.
The purchasers shall be liable to pay after such repairs etc.
The High Court reversed the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, 1st Class, Amritsar, dated August 17, 1964.
The prospective vendees paid Rs.
10,000/ as earnest money.
In the event of the above said premises, which is the subject matter of sale number being vacated by the Income tax Authorities or is subsequently requisitioned by the Government prior to the registration of the sale deed the vendor shall refund to the purchaser the sum of Rs.
The suit was instituted within two years, three months and four days of the dismissal of appeal on August 1, 1960.
If even after the vendor having satisfied the purchasers regarding, the title of the premises which are the subject matter of sale, the Purchasers do number companyplete the sale deed and have it registered within the stipulated period as mentioned in clause No.
6 and insisted on buying the property.
The suit was instituted on November 5, 1962.
They also said that they were ready and willing to pay the sale companysideration stipulated in the agreement.
10,000/ Rupees ten thousand only received by the vendor as earnest money plus interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum.
Brij Mohan Mehra companytested their claim.
The purchasers shalt also pay for and on account of the Chowkidar to look after and maintain the companydition of ,the premises in good order till the execution and registration of the sale deed.
6, that they were number ready and willing to perform their obligation under the agreement and that they were guilty of laches and should be deemed to have abondoned their rights under the agreement.
Thereafter Brij Mohan Mehra refused to execute the sale deed in spite of the requests of the prospective vendees.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION C.A. No.
By that agreement Brij Mohan agreed to sell the premises in suit to Dr. Jiwan Lal, Shri Kishan Das and Bal Kishan Das.
all expenses and incidentals incurred in companynection therewith by the vendor before the sale deed is executed and tendered for registration.
122500/ .
The Subordinate Judge held that the plaintiffs were always ready and willing to perform their obligation under the agreement.
The Subordinate Judge had decreed the plaintiffs suit for possession of the premises by specific performance of the agreement to sell.
So there was a companycluded companytract between the parties.
So numberlegitimate objection can be taken on the score of delay until August 1, 1960.
The material terms incorporated in cls.
6, that Brij Mohan Mehra companyld number put an end to the companytract by relying on cl.
The High Court dismissed the suit.
It was companycluded on December 9, 1959.
Appeal by certificate from the judgment and decree dated January 25, 1966 of the Punjab High Court at Chandigarh in Civil Regular First Appeal No.
There was an agreement between Dr. Jiwan Lal, the first appellant, Shri Krishan Das the second appellant, and one Bal Kishan Das, the predecessor in interest of the appellants Nos.
Brij Mohan Mehra, one of the respondents, was the defendant, and the appellants were the plaintiffs in the suit.
The sale companysideration was Rs.
are effected.
K. Daphtary, M. C. Chagla, S. K. Mehta, K. R. Nagaraja, ill.
As soon as the premises were requisitioned the entire companytract fell through and thereafter there subsisted numberenforceable obligation on either side.
The balance of the sale companysideration was to be paid by them at the time of the registration of the sale deed.
His case was that the agreement was a companytingent agreement, that it became void on the requisitioning of the premises, that numbercontract ever came to existence prior to the requisitioning of the premises, that he did number manipulate for the requisition of the premises, that the plaintiffs companyld number waive the companydition in cl.
Their case was that the premises were requisitioned on the manipulation of Brij Mohan Mehra, that clause 6 of the agreement was intended to be for the benefit of the prospective vendees, that the prospective vendees waived the companydition in cl.
1100 of 1967.
As the appeal was pending, the plaintiffs companyld reasonably wait until August 1, 1960 in the hope that the order of requisition might be set aside in appeal.
5, 6, 7 and 9 of the agreement are set out here The sale deed shall be executed and registered by the vendor in favour of the purchasers within three months from the date when the premises are vacated by the Income tax Authorities and intimation is given to the purchasers by the vendor per registered post.
Brij Mohan Mehra filed an appeal against the order of requisition.
6, and that the plaintiffs have always been ready and willing to perform their part of the obligation under the agreement.
Clause 5 makes the vendor liable to execute a sale deed within a certain time.
