TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e complaint which was lodged against the then advocate. In the petition for special leave, it was asserted that the complaint against the Advocate was not being proceeded with and the respondent had remained absent on the relevant date. Said assertion was not answered satisfactorily in the affidavit in reply filed in this Court. The delay ought not to have been condoned by the High Court - the order condoning delay is set aside - possession of the villa which was handed over to the appellants in pursuance of the order dated 23.05.2018 shall continue to remain with the appellants and be taken to be in terms of the Agreement entered into between the parties - appeal disposed off. - CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1928 OF 2019 (Arising out of Specia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /-. Soon thereafter, the respondent filed a Summary Suit for recovery of said amount of ₹ 8,73,556/-. The Suit was registered as CS No.431/14/2008 on the file of Additional District Judge, Tis Hazari, New Delhi. 5. A Consumer Complaint was filed by the appellants being CC/110/2008 against the respondent submitting that though the outstanding amount was tendered by the appellants on 18.10.2007, the respondent refused to accept the same unless the principal sum was accompanied with interest @ 24% and that the project was not completed in time as a result of which the appellants were put to loss. It was prayed that the respondent be asked to deliver possession of villa along with all the facilities and accept the balance payment of &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to lodge a complaint against said advocate before the Bar Council of Delhi, which was pending adjudication and that the respondent ought not to suffer on account of the failure on part of their advocate. The appeal came up before the High Court on 16.04.2018. After going into the rival contentions, the High Court observed: Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, as recorded in the previous orders, where only some part of the total consideration is due and that too the same was tendered by the Respondents but was not accepted by the Appellant Company, it is directed that the balance sale consideration of ₹ 5,13,850/-, shall be deposited by the Respondents in this Court within a period of four weeks. Upon the same b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he principal sum, was deposited by the appellants with the Registry of the High Court. The amount was, thereafter, converted into a Fixed Deposit Receipt awaiting final directions in the matter. According to the order dated 23.05.2018, it was undertaken by the respondent that the villa would be handed over and the possession of the villa was accordingly handed over to the appellants. 11. Thereafter, the matter came up before the High Court on 25.07.2018. The High Court accepted the explanation for condonation of delay and condoned the delay of 721 days, subject to payment of costs of ₹ 20,000/- to be made over by the respondent to the appellants. The High Court also observed:- 6. The subject suit was a suit for recovery of mon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s advanced by learned counsel for both the sides. The following features are clear:- a) The balance sum of ₹ 5,13,850/- which was supposed to be due from the appellants was deposited by the appellants. b) In terms of the order dated 23.05.2018 the amount so deposited stands converted into a Fixed Deposit Receipt. c) In terms of the order dated 23.05.2018 and as undertaken by the respondent, possession of the villa was made over to the appellants. 14. In the instant case, that the High Court in its order dated 16.04.2018 had sought to bring about a situation where the area of controversy could be minimized and at the same time the possession of the villa could be made over the appellant. The next order dated 23.05. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uently, the First Appeal also stands dismissed. 16. However, considering the developments that have taken place while the appeal was pending in the High Court, we pass following directions:- a) The possession of the villa which was handed over to the appellants in pursuance of the order dated 23.05.2018 shall continue to remain with the appellants and be taken to be in terms of the Agreement entered into between the parties. b) The amount of ₹ 5,13,850/- deposited by the appellants in the Registry of the High Court which stands converted into a Fixed Deposit Receipt, upon maturity shall be made over to the respondent along with interest accrued thereon. c) The pending appeal before the State Commission shall be deal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
