Senior citizen gets possession of house in Lutyens
Court observed that it would be "a travesty of justice" if the tenant is allowed a lengthy trial just because he transferred money in owner`s account.
New Delhi: A retired government official has been given possession of his house in Lutyens zone here by a Delhi court which observed that it would be "a travesty of justice" if the tenant is allowed a lengthy trial just because he had transferred huge money in the owner`s account.
Additional district judge Ina Malhotra passed the decree of possession in favour of Ashok Kumar Aggarwal, who had moved the court seeking possession of his flat which he had given on rent to Daman resident Ketan Patel.
"It would indeed be a travesty of justice if every tenant could get his way for a lengthy trial merely by transferring a fair enough amount online to the owner`s account and hold him at ransom for specific performance for sale of his property.
"The action of the defendant (Patel) only reeks of an attempt to create legal entangles," the court said.
Aggarwal, in his plea, said that he had superannuated from government service and had to vacate the accommodation alloted to him.
He said that he required the possession of his premises at White House apartment situated at Bhagwan Dass Road here which he had given to Patel on a rent of Rs 45,000 per month and he had not extended the lease agreement requesting Patel to vacate the premises.
Patel did not pay any heed even though his tenancy had expired on May 31, 2011, Aggarwal said, adding he sent a legal notice to Patel on November 11 last year asking him to vacate the flat by the end of the month.
He said Patel had assured he would leave the house before December 10, 2011 but as he was in the dire need of his house, so he did not agree to give any time beyond November 30.
He also said that Patel had not paid rent from June 2011, but in December 2011 he transferred Rs 50 lakh electronically in his account without any intimation.
Patel contested the plea saying Aggarwal had expressed his desire to sell the flat and a deal was struck for sale at Rs 1.75 crore. He alleged that he had given Rs 50 lakh cash and transferred another Rs 50 lakh in Aggarwal`s account as per the deal.
Aggarwal, however, denied execution of any agreement or receipt of Rs 50 lakh in cash and said that Patel transferred Rs 50 lakh in his account without any authority or intimation.
The court, in its order, observed that Patel had admitted that he did not have any receipt or acknowledgment for the money which he allegedly paid and it is "highly unbelievable" that such a huge amount of money would be paid without having any receipt.
Regarding transfer of Rs 50 lakh by Patel in Aggarwal`s account, the court said, "Mere transfer of an amount into someone`s account without any corroboration of it being towards a sale consideration, is legally not sustainable."
It also noted that Aggarwal`s flat is situated at a prime location in Delhi while Patel had alleged that it was on sale for only Rs 1.75 crore.
"Judicial notice is also being taken of the fact that the property sought to be purchased by the defendant is situated in a prestigious building and at a prime location for which the defendant alleges the sale consideration is Rs 1.75 crore only.
"Even a DDA flat, in far remoter colonies of Delhi, would fetch a much higher consideration," the court noted.