← Library
High Court of DelhiO.M.P.(I)/23/2016

Rajeev Verma v. D.C.Aggarwal & ANR.

2016-07-15Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru2 pages

$~50 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P.(I) 23/2016 RAJEEV VERMA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr Rohit Gandhi, Advocate.

versus D.C.AGGARWAL & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr Ankit Jain, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 15.07.2016 IA No.8113/2016 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

O.M.P.(I) 23/2016 This is a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, inter alia, praying as under:- "(A) Pass ad-interim ex-parte order restraining the respondents alienating or creating third party interest in the property measuring 470 sq. yds. Comprising of land and structure in property No.2, Under Hill Road, Civil Lines, Delhi."

It is the petitioner's case that the petitioner has paid the entire consideration for the purchase of the property bearing no.2, Under Hill Road, Civil Lines, Delhi. However, the respondent nos.1 & 2 are not coming forward to execute the sale deed for the said property as agreed in terms of the Agreement to Sell dated 18.04.2016.

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents states that the respondents have no objection to execute the sale deed. The sale deed could not be executed as the guardian of respondent no.2 was not available in the city during the relevant period. Both the counsels agree that the sale deed for the said property shall be executed and registered within two weeks from today.

With the consent of the parties, I direct that the petitioner shall supply copy of the draft Sale Deed to the learned counsel for the respondents within a period of one week from today. The parties shall appear before the concerned Sub-Registrar, Tis Hazari, on 10.08.2016 at 10:30 AM. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the respondents states that the respondent no.2 is differently abled and will execute the Sale Deed through his lawful guardian Ms Ruchika Aggarwal. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents also concurs with the said statement. In view of the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J JULY 15, 2016 MK