SURJEET KAUR KHURANA vs SUMITRA DEVI AND ANR

Judgment text excerpt

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 28th March, 2025 + CM(M) 397/2023, CM APPL. 11754/2023 & CM APPL. 32411/2024 SURJEET KAUR KHURANA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Praveen Suri with Mr. Sumit Pandey, Advocates. versus SUMITRA DEVI AND ANR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Atul T N with Ms. Nazmeen Ahmed, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner herein was defending a suit for possession and mesne profits. She suffered a decree. When execution was filed against her, she raised objection by filing an application under Section 47 of CPC. 2. The challenge laid in the present petition is with respect to the dismissal of her such application. 3. To understand her grievance, let me, briefly, capture the essential facts which led to passing of decree. I shall be referring to the parties as per their nomenclature before the learned Trial Court and, therefore, petitioner herein shall be referred to as defendant no.1. 4. Defendant no.1 was absolute owner of a property situated in Abadi, known as Ranjit Nagar, Shadipur, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “suit property”). 5. The plaintiffs approached defendant No.1 for purchase of „under construction‟ entire 2nd floor Flat of said property, with one car parking and one two-wheeler parking space on stilt area (below Ground Floor) and after verbal talks, the deal was finalized for a total amount of Rs.47,00,000/-. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 397/2023 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:29.03.2025 15:46:40 6. Initially, one agreement known as Property Development Agreement was executed between them on 25.12.2011. As per the agreement, the construction of said property was to be completed by 31.05.2012 and in terms of the agreement, the advance paym