HARI SINGH vs KITABO DEVI

Judgment text excerpt

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 15th December, 2025 + RFA 403/2015 HARI SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. G.D. Parashar, Ms. Shanta Parashar, Mr. Satish Vijay, Mr. Lalit Bhargava, Mr. Aryan Yadav and Ms. Ritika Yadav, Advs. versus KITABO DEVI .....Respondent Through: Mr. A.K. Pandey, Adv. with Ms. Ayushi Pandey, Adv. M: 9312982075 Email: [email protected] CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL): 1. The present appeal has been filed seeking setting aside of the judgment and decree dated 23rd March, 2015, passed by the Additional District Judge (“ADJ”)-02, South-West District, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in Suit No. 885/2012, titled as “Sh. Hari Singh Versus Smt. Kitabo Devi”. 2. The impugned judgment emanates from a suit for specific performance filed on behalf of the appellant with respect to property bearing No. B-155, Village Matiyala, colony known as Mansa Ram Park, Uttam Nagar, Delhi- 110059. 3. As recorded in the last order dated 15th November, 2025, the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed RFA 403/2015 Page 1 of 3 By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:15.12.2025 20:42:50 following had transpired between the parties: “xxx xxx xxx 3. During the course of the arguments, learned counsel appearing for the appellant pleaded that the appellant has paid a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- to the respondent. However, during the course of cross- examination of the respondent-Ms. Kitabo Devi, she has admitted to payment of only Rs. 2,50,000/-. The other amounts, as alleged to have been paid to the respondent, have been denied by the respondent by denying the signatures on the receipts. 4. The evidence on record shows that the said signatures of the respondent on the alleged receipts for further payments have not been proved befor