JEENAT JAHAN AND ANR vs SUPERTECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 18.11.2025 + FAO 39/2025 & CM APPL. 17589/2025 JEENAT JAHAN AND ANR .....Appellants Through: Mr. Sarthak Ahuja and Ms. Sabika Ahmad, Advocates. Versus SUPERTECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Dharmendra Kumar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA JUDGMENT (ORAL) CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J. 1. The present appeal under Section 104 read with Order XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the CPC) has been filed by the appellants/plaintiffs in CS No. 3363/2024 against order dated 11.02.2025 passed by the learned District Judge – 06, South- East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, whereby application filed by the appellants/plaintiffs under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 of CPC was dismissed. 2. Briefly stated, in August 2023, the parties entered into an agreement for sale of the suit property i.e. Flat No.153-A, Ground Signature Not Verified Signed By:KOMAL FAO 39/2025 Page 1 DHAWAN Signing Date:21.11.2025 17:24:44 Floor, Pocket-12, Group-II, Jasola, New Delhi, for a consideration of ₹33,00,000/-. The appellants/plaintiffs paid ₹3,00,000/- by cheque dated 19.08.2023 and undertook conversion expenses, with conversion carried out on 30.04.2004. The appellants/plaintiffs thereafter faced difficulty in procuring a home loan as the property was not freehold, however, they ultimately secured a loan of ₹20,00,000/-. During this period, fearing that the property might be sold to a third party, they moved an application for interim injunction. The respondents then resiled from the agreement, claiming the property's value had increased to ₹42,00,000/- and alleging delay by the appellants/plaintiffs, as also communicated in an e-mail dated 03.08.2024. Meanwhile, the ownership