Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2015 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 1231 - HC - Indian LawsSuit for declaration, possession, cancellation of Agreement to Sell - ex parte decree - HELD THAT - This Court is prima facie of the opinion that in view of the registered Sale Deed dated 21st June, 2003, the defendant No.1 had no right, title or interest in the suit property and he had no power to execute another Agreement to Sell in October, 2003 - the legal representatives of defendant No.3 are directed to deposit the entire rental amount being received by them with the Registry of this Court after deducting the TDS within a period of six weeks. Even future rentals shall be deposited with the Registry of this Court. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
1. Recording of statement under Order 10 Rule 2 without Oath. 2. Scope and implications of Order 10 Rule 2 in Civil Procedure Code. 3. Amendment in Civil Procedure Code regarding verification of pleadings. 4. Interpretation of Order 10 Rule 4(2) in Civil Procedure Code. 5. Deposit of rent for the suit premises in Court. 6. Validity of Sale Deed and Agreement to Sell transactions. 7. Direction for depositing rental amounts with the Court Registry. 8. Direction for maintaining rental amounts in an interest-bearing Fixed Deposit Receipt. 9. Requirement for legal representatives to provide statement of accounts to plaintiffs. 10. Liberty granted to legal representatives for seeking reimbursement of expenses and taxes. Analysis: 1. The judgment addresses the issue of recording a statement under Order 10 Rule 2 without Oath. The Court clarifies that the statement must be recorded under Oath to elucidate the matter in controversy in the suit, as per the amended Civil Procedure Code. The judgment highlights the necessity of adhering to the updated legal provisions. 2. The judgment delves into the scope and implications of Order 10 Rule 2 in the Civil Procedure Code. It emphasizes that while the rule does not entail taking evidence, the statements recorded are integral to the pleading process. The Court's interpretation underscores the significance of these statements in clarifying the issues in the suit. 3. An important aspect discussed in the judgment is the amendment in the Civil Procedure Code concerning the verification of pleadings. The Court points out the amendment in Order 6 Rule 15(4) which mandates that every pleading must be supported by an affidavit. This amendment signifies a crucial procedural requirement in the legal framework. 4. The judgment interprets Order 10 Rule 4(2) of the Civil Procedure Code regarding the consequences of a party's refusal to be examined under Order 10 CPC. It elucidates that failure to appear without lawful excuse may result in the Court pronouncing judgment against the party or making suitable orders related to the suit. This interpretation underscores the legal repercussions of non-compliance. 5. Moving on to the issue of depositing rent for the suit premises in Court, the judgment provides a detailed account of the legal proceedings related to a property dispute. It outlines the sequence of events leading to the dispute and the subsequent directions given by the Court regarding the deposit of rental amounts with the Court Registry. 6. The judgment scrutinizes the validity of Sale Deed and Agreement to Sell transactions concerning the suit property. It analyzes the discrepancies in the transactions and concludes that the registered Sale Deed dated earlier established the plaintiff's rightful claim to the property, invalidating subsequent transactions by the defendant. 7. A significant directive in the judgment pertains to the depositing of rental amounts received by the legal representatives of the defendant with the Court Registry. The Court mandates the depositing of current and future rentals, emphasizing the need to maintain transparency and accountability in the financial aspects of the dispute. 8. Furthermore, the judgment instructs the Court Registry to keep the deposited amounts in an interest-bearing Fixed Deposit Receipt. This directive ensures the prudent management of the funds involved in the dispute, safeguarding the financial interests of the parties. 9. The judgment underscores the obligation of the legal representatives of the defendant to provide a statement of accounts to the plaintiffs. This requirement aims to facilitate clarity and documentation in the financial transactions related to the suit property, promoting transparency and accountability. 10. Lastly, the judgment grants the legal representatives the liberty to seek reimbursement of expenses and taxes related to the suit property. This provision acknowledges the legitimate financial concerns of the legal representatives and allows them the opportunity to address such matters through a formal application process. In conclusion, the judgment offers a comprehensive analysis of various legal issues encompassing procedural requirements, evidentiary considerations, financial directives, and rights of the parties involved in the property dispute, ensuring a thorough and detailed adjudication of the case.
|