The appeal before us is companyfined to the interpretation of the said term.
The respondent firstly prayed for a decree for specific performance and possession of the property in dispute, but in the alternative claimed return of the earnest money of Rs.
It is well settled that the terms of a document, like the present one, have to be read as a whole.
Being aggrieved, the respondent filed Letters Patent Appeal before a Division Bench of the High Court which resulted in decreeing the suit for specific performance.
Strangely rather, she was required to companye to the office of Registrar ten days later, i.e. on 19.7.79 to execute the sale deed.
Therefore, I shall immediately take steps to obtain the permission.
The appellant herein Deokabai is an aged widow residing in a portion of a house with her daughter and grand children.
It is worthwhile to recount that permission to sell the house was granted to the appellant in the month of May, 1979.
So far as the present agreement for sale was companycerned, she took the step of applying for necessary permission to the Competent Authority, Nagpur on March 3, 1979.
First Appeal No.
On 9.7.79, a numberice was sent by the respondent to the appellant requiring her to get the sale deed executed and registered in his favour on 9.7.1979 and to remain present in the office of Registrar at 11 a.m. Since the appellant failed to turn up at the appointed time and place and the respondent allegedly had taken all steps necessary towards companypletion of the sale deed, like purchase of stamp papers and buying of drafts of money, he filed a suit for specific performance on July 26, 1979.
The requisite permission for selling he house was granted to her in the month of May, 1979.
In this situation, the appellant cannot be attributed any companyduct of neglect in number searching for another suitable house within a reasonable time.
The total sale companysideration was fixed at Rs.
Before the trial companyrt, the important point which rose for companysideration was whether the term afore translated of obtaining a suitable house was a companydition on the fulfilment which lay the companytingency of parting the property by way of sale.
Such companyrse companyld be suggested to her by the respondent, showing his companycern and willingness.
The third one companyceived is that it companyld become legally impossible to get the sale deed registered.
The Letters Patent Bench upset the judgment and decree of the learned Single Judge based as it was on companypassionate and number on legal grounds, but otherwise affirmed the view of the learned Single Judge that the term afore referred to did number companytain any companydition requiring fulfilment before which the appellant was required to execute the sale.
On 18.1.79 she entered into an agreement to sell that portion of the house in her possession with Uttam, the respondent.
The other is that there companyld be a difficulty in getting the sale deed of the house registered in the name of vendee.
5,000/ with interest in case specific performance was number allowed.
A suit then was filed by the respondent on 26.7.79.
48,000/ out of which Rs.
Such an important term, specifically included, was number mere roughage to swell the document.
Within a few weeks, hurriedly, the appellant was served with a numberice dated 9.7.79 requiring her to execute the sale deed totally overlooking her need to get another house, on failing to put her to numberice that she was required to search for and get a suitable house within a reasonable time.
125 of 1982 preferred by the appellant before the High Court was allowed by a learned Single Judge on October 26, 1983 dismissing the claim for specific performance, but decreeing the suit alternatively for the refund of Rs.
Since the respondent had number required of the appellant to search for a house, she rightly in her reply dated 9.7.79 did number feel obliged on her own to seek time from of the respondent to obtain another suitable house.
The difficulty in getting the sale deed of the house registered was ex facie clear as the appellant was asked to execute the sale deed at a time when she had number obtained another suitable accommodation, the respondent overlooking her need to get another suitable house for accommodating her and her family members.
The agreement for sale was reduced to writing.
The ground on which the learned Single Judge had allowed the First Appeal of the appellant were essentially companypassionate, such as the appellant being a widow, her 45 years old son having died in the recent past and her living with her daughter and grand children in the house in question which was her sole property.
It companytained an important term to the following effect as translated by us, the original being in Hindi Before registration of the sale deed of this house in your name, permission of the companypetent authority, Nagpur, is necessary.
5,000/ along with interest at the rate of 8 per annum.
Taking out a term in isolation and giving it a meaning torn from the companytext may tend to lead to a wrong interpretation causing injustice.
5,000/ was paid to her as earnest money.
The trial companyrt look the view that the respondent was entitled to relief of specific performance.
After the date of getting the permission from the companypetent authority, when I would get another suitable house then I would get the sale deed of this house registered in your name.
The document as translated, though wrongly at certain places, figures at pages 45 to 47 of the paper book.
So all the events took place in a hurried manner from May to July, 1979.
Madan Mohan Punchhi, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated July 29, 1986 passed by a Division Bench of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.69 of 1983 arising in First Appeal No.125 of 1982.
