TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 1211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant no. 1; however inspite of the plaintiff no. 1 being ready and willing, the defendant no. 1 did not fulfill his obligations under the earnest money receipt/bayana; (c). that the defendant no. 1 also took huge amount of approximately Rs. 12 lacs from the plaintiff no. 1 under another two Agreements-cum-Bayana Rasid for two other plots but failed to convey the same also to the plaintiff no. 1; (d). that subsequently the plaintiff no. 1 realized that the defendant no. 1 had cheated and defrauded the plaintiffs on the pretext of selling the aforesaid properties to the plaintiffs when he had no right to sell the same; (e). that the defendant no. 1 however threatened the plaintiff no. 1 of dire consequences if plaintiff no. 1 raised any alarm; (f). that the plaintiff no. 1 sent two legal notices dated 18th March, 2008 to the defendant no. 1 in this regard but which the defendant no. 1 failed to receive; (g). that thereafter on 29th April, 2008 the defendant no. 1 represented to the plaintiff no. 1 that he will get the plaintiff no. 1 compensated for the losses so suffered by the plaintiff no. 1 by betting in cricket matches; (h). that the plaintiff no. 1 trusting the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no. 2 Shri Ashok Grover with respect to Shop No. A-2/137, Ground Floor, Sector-3, Rohini, Delhi and registered with the Office of the Sub Registrar, VI-A, Pitampura, Delhi as document no. 2877, in additional book No. I, Volume No. 2833 at pages 1-7 on 09/04/09; (ii) for recovery of Rs. 25 lacs from the defendant no. 1; and, (iii) for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from transferring, selling, alienating or disposing of respective properties. Summons of the suit were issued though interim relief sought not granted. The defendant no. 1 and the defendant no. 2 have filed their written statements. The defendant no. 3 has filed IA No. 8014/2012 under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC pleading that no cause of action against the defendant no. 3 is disclosed in the plaint and no relief also against the defendant no. 3 is claimed in the suit and bald allegations against defendant no. 3 have been made to create a false defense in a complaint filed by the defendant no. 3 against the plaintiff no. 2 in the Courts at Dehradun, Uttarakhand of offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. The plaintiffs have filed a joint replication to the separate writte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icket to which the defendant no. 1 had lured the plaintiff no. 1 into. The plaintiffs however in the plaint have not claimed any relief with respect to the said cheque. The reliefs claimed as aforesaid are only of cancellation of documents, recovery of Rs. 25 lacs from the defendant no. 1 and of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dealing with the properties. Though the plaintiffs have filed a reply to the said application of the defendant no. 3 but therein also have only pleaded that there exist averments in the plaint which disclose cause of action but have not been able to plead as to what is the relief claimed against the defendant no. 3. 8. Mere making of averments against or with respect to a defendant without claiming any relief against that defendant is not sufficient for allowing the plaintiff to proceed with the suit against such defendant as the Court is not to allow its time to be wasted in an empty exercise. The plaintiffs inspite of the application having been filed by the defendant no. 3 pointing out that no relief has been claimed in the plaint against the defendant no. 3 have chosen not to correct the mistake even if any and no relief qua the ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The principle of public policy is, ex dolo malo non-oritur action i.e. no court will lend its aid to a man who founds his cause of action upon an immoral or an illegal act. If, from the litigant's own stating or otherwise, the cause of action appears to arise ex turpi causa or in transgression of a positive law of the country, the Court will refuse to render its assistance to such a litigant. The Supreme Court in Nair Service Society Ltd. Vs. Rev. Father K.C. Alexander AIR 1968 SC 1165 held that in a case in which a litigant must rely upon his own illegality, the Court may refuse him assistance. Similarly in Smt. Surasaibalini Debi Vs. Phanindra Mohan Majumdar AIR 1965 SC 1364 also it was held that if the litigant seeks the assistance of the Court to effectuate an illegal transaction, the Court will refuse to assist him. In Sita Ram Vs. Radha Bai AIR 1968 SC 534 it was held that the principle that the Courts will refuse to enforce an illegal agreement at the instance of a person who is himself a party to an illegality or fraud is expressed in the maxim in pari delicto potior est conditio defendentis. Similarly in Kedar Nath Motani Vs. Prahlad Rai AIR 1960 SC 213 it was held t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Full Bench decision in Ghulam Ahmed v. Mohd. Iqbal AIR 1970 J K 165 where a partnership which entailed transfer of truck and its route permit to the partnership business, in contravention of the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act was held to be void in entirety. 12. Thus the claim for recovery of Rs. 25 lacs against the defendant no. 1 has no basis in law. 13. That brings me to the other relief sought by the plaintiffs, of the cancellation of the Sale Deed. The Sale Deed is admittedly a registered document. The plaintiffs admit their signatures thereon. The said Sale Deed records the same to be for a consideration of Rs. 1,75,700/- paid and received in cash. I have enquired from the counsel for the plaintiffs that if suits of the present nature challenging registered documents were to be entertained and title to immovable properties transacted thereunder put under a cloud, there would no sanctity left of such transaction and no transaction would be free from challenge; people would fear entering into such transaction for the reason of the seller, inspite of the transaction, filing such suits. The pleadings as aforesaid are vague. The consideration is again steeped in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
