PRADEEP BATRA vs KULDIP SINGH VERMA

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: 04.02.2026 Date of decision:25.03.2026 + RFA(OS) 4/2026 & CM APPL. 4597/2026, 4599/2026 PRADEEP BATRA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Viraj Datar, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Samar Singh Kachwaha, Ms.Shivangi Nanda, Mr. Arsh Rampal and Mr. Srikant Singh, Advs. versus KULDIP SINGH VERMA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manish Kaushik, Mr. Vikas Ashwani, Mr. Mainak Sarkar and Ms.Aparna Kushwah, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal has been preferred under Section 96, read with Order XLI Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(“CPC”) read with Section 10 of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018, against the Judgment dated 24.12.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge in CS (OS) 871/2024, whereby the plaint instituted by the Appellant seeking specific performance of the Agreement to Sell dated 29.10.2023was rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, as set out by the Appellant, are that the Appellant instituted a suit seeking a declaration that the Respondent’s communication dated 16.03.2024, purporting to terminate the oral Agreement Signature Not Verified Signed By:ROHIT SAIN Signing Date:25.03.2026 05:19:01 RFA(OS) 4/2026 Page 1 of 11 to Sell dated 29.10.2023, is illegal, invalid and non-est in the eyes of law. The Appellant further sought a decree of specific performance of the said oral Agreement in respect of the property bearing Second Floor, B-1/17, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, along with 50% front terrace rights and proportionate land rights, as well as consequential injunctive relief restraining the Defendant/Respondent from creating any third-party rights in respect of the Suit Property. 3.