IN

THE
HON’BL
E
High court of delhi

In the matter of

SHRI DEVI DAYAL MEHTA.....................................................................APPELLANT

VERSUS

MADHU BALA JAIN................................................................................RESPONDENT

COUNSELS APPEARING ON BEHALF OF SHRI DEVI DAYAL MEHTA

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT

ANAND SINGH

Semester- I (A)

Roll No. 31

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table Of Abbreviations And Symbols....................................................................................i

Table Of Authorities..............................................................................................................ii

Statement Of Jurisdiction......................................................................................................iii

Statement Of Facts................................................................................................................iv

Issues Raised..........................................................................................................................vi

Summary Of Arguments......................................................................................................vii

Written Pleadings...................................................................................................................1

CONTENTION 1...............................................................................................................1

CONTENTION 2...............................................................................................................3

Prayer for Relief.....................................................................................................................6

2
 T able Of Abbreviations And Symbols

S. No. ABBREVIATION DEFINITION

1. & And

2. AIR All India Reporter

3. Art. Article

4. Ed. Edition

5. Hon’ble Honourable

6. Ors. Others

7. SC Supreme Court

8. SCC Supreme Court Cases

9. SCR Supreme Court Reporter

10. Supp. Supplement

11. Supra Pages above

12. S. Section

13. UOI The Union of India

15. v. Versus

16. Vol. Volume

3
 T able Of Authorities

L IST OF CASES-

1. Chandnee Widya Vati Madden Vs. C.L. Katial and Ors,

S TATUTES

1. Indian contract act, 1872

B OOKS REFERRED

4. Avatar Singh, contracts and specific relief, EBC, 12th edition

D ATABASE

6. MANUPATRA
7. SCC ONLINE

4
 S tatement Of Jurisdiction

The Hon’ble Delhi high court is empowered to hear this case by the virtue of Section
96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. This is an appeal against the judgment and
decree of the civil judge. Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure reads as follows-

(1) Save where otherwise expressly provided in the body of this Code or by any other law for the
time being in force, an appeal shall lie from every decree passed by any Court exercising original
jurisdiction the Court authorized to hear appeals from the decisions of such Court.

(2) An appeal may lie from an original decree passed ex pane.

(3) No appeal shall lie from a decree passed by the Court with the consent of parties.

1
[(4) No appeal shall lie, except on a question of law, from a decree in any suit of the nature
cognisable by Courts of Small Cause, when the amount or value of the subject-matter of the
original suit does not exceed 2[ten thousand rupees].]

2
 S tatement Of Facts

1. Shri Devi Dayal Mehta, as a seller (defendant) entered into an agreement with plaintiffs
as the buyer to sell in respect to the property No. XIII/3578-80 Gali Santrashan, Bara
Hindu Rao Delhi on 11.11.1981.

2. The total sale consideration was of Rs. 45,000/- and of which a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was
already
received by the Shri Devi Dayal Mehta (defendant) prior to the agreement of sell as
advance.

3. The balance sale consideration of Rs. 25,000/- was to be paid to the Shri Devi Dayal
Mehta (defendant) at the time of registration of the sale deed.

4. On account of the defendant failing to execute the sale deed, the plaintiffs filed the suit
for specific performance and which has been decreed by the impugned judgment and
decree of the trail court. Defendant has challenged this decree.

3
 Issues Raised

1. Whether the agreement to sell in question was contingent contract and not enforceable
under the rule?

2. Whether the agreement to sell was determined and treated as cancelled?

3. Whether respondents are entitled to the relief of specific performance?

4
 Summary of Arguments

1. The contract was contingent in nature as defined in Indian Contract Act, 1872 and
not enforceable under the rule: A contract is said to be contingent contract where the
promisor performs his obligation only when certain conditions are met. If two or more
parties enter into a contract to do or not do something, if an event which is collateral to
the contract does or does not happen, then it is a contingent contract. The contract will
become enforceable when the sale certificate will be issued. The sale certificate of the
property was not issued yet, hence the performance of the contract by Shri Devi Dayal
Mehta can not be done against the respondents.

2. The agreement to sell was determined and treated as cancelled: The appellant make
the necessary application for the permission of the Chief Commissioner for issuance of
the sale certificate, but later on she had withdrawn the same because the application was
taking too much time to get approved by the Chief Commissioner and hence the
agreement to sell became cancelled.

3. The respondents are not entitled to the relief of specific performance: The appellant
has withdrawn the application for issuance of the certificate of sale for the property from
the Chief Commissioner office and the contract will be enforceable only when the sale
certificate of the property will be issued, hence the contract is not enforceable and the
respondents are not entitled to the relief of specific performance.

5
 Written Pleadings

CONTENTION 1:

The contract was contingent in nature-

I. A contract is a contingent contract if-

Section 31 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 defines contingent contract as: A “contingent
contract” is a contract to do or not to do something, if some event, collateral to such contract,
does or does not happen.

When the agreement was being formed there were couple of clauses that were present and they
had to be fulfilled in order to make the agreement compiling on both the parties, this will insure
that a valid contract has taken place between two parties. The first contingency that was present
in the agreement was that of the part payment and the second installment that was required was
never made, the second contingency that was present was of the sanction to the decree that was
to be given by the chief commissioner, the commissioner never gave the sanction to the decree
and another contingency that was present in the contract was fulfilled.

In Chandnee Widya Vati Madden Vs. C.L. Katial and Ors, there were similar circumstances
and the question was that Is the contract contingent or impossible of performance and is
uncertain and vague and is therefore void? The trial Court in a very elaborate judgment
dismissed the suit for specific performance of contract and for a permanent injunction and
decreed the sum of Rs. 11,550/- by way of damages, with proportionate costs, against the
defendant. Though the Court found that the plaintiffs had been throughout ready and willing,
indeed anxious, to perform their part of the contract, and that it was the defendant who backed
out of it, it refused the main relief of specific performance of the contract on the ground that the
agreement was inchoate in view of the fact that the previous sanction of the Chief Commissioner
to the proposed transfer had not been obtained.

6
II. The first floor of the property is given to a tenant under Delhi Rent Control Act-

The appellant has given the first floor of the on tenancy to one Sh. Mohd. Aklakh. and the same
decree has been also registered under the Delhi rent control act and this decree happened after
the sale agreement was made but after that the tenants have took possession of the first floor.
This tenancy is under the Delhi Rent Control Act and therefore it would be upon the respondents
to evict the tenant through investment of a lot of time and expenditure.  The appellant is not in a
position to deliver possession of this portion to the respondents.

III. The contract was made for the benefit of the father and father expired-

7
The agreement made was made for the benefit for the father of the respondent and the father of
the respondent expired before the contract could be made, the benefit of the father was an
essential and it was kept in mind while making the agreement1

1
1. AIR 978, 1964 SCR (2) 495.

8
 P rayer for Relief

Wherefore, in the light of facts presented, arguments advanced and authorities

1. That the appeal instituted be allowed.

The court may also please to pass any other order, which the court may deem fit in
the light of justice, equity and good conscience.

All of which is most humbly prayed.

23RD OCTOBER, 2019 COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT