ROMI GARG vs BDR BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 02.12.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 09.01.2026 Judgment uploaded on: 09.01.2026 + FAO(OS)116/2018 ROMI GARG ....Appellant Through: Mr. Manish Vashisht, Sr. Adv. With Ms. Nandini Sahni, Mr. Vedansh Vashisht and Mr. Swapan Singhal, Advs. versus BDR BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. R.K. Mishra, Adv. for R-1. Ms. Anumeha Singhai, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J 1. Through present Appeal, the Appellant assails the correctness of the orders dated 16.01.2018 and 14.03.2018 [hereinafter referred to as „Impugned Order-1‟ and „Impugned Order-2‟], passed by the learned Single Judge [hereinafter referred to as „LSJ‟] in a case being CS(OS) 14/2018 titled “Romi Garg v. BDR Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors”. 2. The issue which arises for consideration in the present Appeal Signature Not Verified Signed By:SAVITA PASRICHA Signing Date:09.01.2026 FAO(OS)116/2018 Page 1 of 15 16:30:14 is whether in the absence of any specific provision, will it be appropriate to invoke the inherent power under Section 151 of the CPC to advance the cause of justice. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties before this court shall be referred to in accordance with their status before the LSJ. FACTUAL MATRIX 4. The present case has a chequered history. Sh. Lalit Modi [the Defendant No.2 herein] was the owner of the property bearing No. 32, Paschimi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as „Suit Property‟]. 5. The Plaintiff asserts that an Agreement to Sell [hereinafter referred to as „ATS‟] was executed in his favour by Defendant No.2 on 09.07.2012 with respect to the sale of Suit P