CA Nos. 1209-1210 of 2003                                                                          1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1209-1210 OF 2003

    VIJAYA SRIVASTAVA ..... APPELLANT

VERSUS

    M/S MIRAHUL ENTERPRISES & ORS. ..... RESPONDENTS

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1211-1212 OF 2003

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3353-3354 OF 2010  @ SLP(C) 8448-8449 OF 2010

CIVIL APEPAL NO. 3351-3352 OF 2010  @ SLP(C) 8450-8451 OF 2010

AND CIVIL APPEAL NO.  3397  OF 2010  

@ SLP (C)  NO. 11430 OF 2010

O R D E R

1. We  have  heard  the  learned  counsel  for  the  

parties at very great length.

2. There are two sets of agreements to sell both

CA Nos. 1209-1210 of 2003                                                                          2

dated  2/11/1983  interse  Vijaya  Shrivastava  and  M/s  

Mirahul Enterprises and the second between Admiral R.R.  

Sood & M/s. Mirahul Enterprises.   Vijaya Shrivastava  

and Admiral R.R. Sood are the plaintiffs in the suits  

whereas  Mirahul  Enterprises  –  respondent  is  the  

builder.   The respondent has attempted to challenge  

the  validity  of  these  two  agreements.  The  Division  

Bench of the High Court in its impugned judgments dated  

14.07.2008   has  held  that  the  agreements  had  been  

executed and that the price of Rs. 2,64,000/- fixed for  

each of the two flats was indeed the correct price.  On  

the  contrary,  the  Single  Bench,  which  is  the  trial  

court in this case, has given a positive finding that  

the agreements also dated 2/11/1983 which fixed the  

sale price at Rs. 2,64,261/- plus Rs. 1,71,000 in both  

the cases were in fact which needed to be specifically  

enforced.  Be that as it may, in order to balance the  

equities  between  the  parties  and  on  account  of  the  

number  of  years  that  have  gone  by,  we  deem  it  

appropriate  that  though  the  Division  Bench  in  its  

judgment  had  recorded  a  positive  finding  that  the  

amount  to  be  paid  for  each  of  the  flats  was  Rs.  

2,64,261  yet  as  the  execution  of  second  agreement  

fixing a higher price has not been denied by the flat  

owner applicants, it would balance the equities if the

CA Nos. 1209-1210 of 2003                                                                          3

aforesaid plaintiff-appellants are called upon to pay  

some  extra  amount  to  the  respondent.   We  are  also  

informed that a sum of Rs. 9 lakhs lies deposited in  

respect of both the properties in this Court under the  

interim  orders  dated  07th February,  2003.   We,  

accordingly, feel that the interests of justice would  

be met if a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs i.e. 2 lakhs each to be  

apportioned between the two plaintiffs is deducted and  

paid to the respondent i.e. M/s. Mirahul enterprises  

and that the balance amount deposited in this Court be  

returned to the plaintiffs forthwith.  We also direct  

that the sale consideration that has been deposited by  

M/s Mirahul Enterpirses in this Court or in the High  

Court shall be refunded to them forthwith.  The appeals  

are disposed of in the above terms.

3. Mr. A.T.M. Sampath the learned counsel appearing  

for Mohd. Arshad, the appellant in Civil Appeal No.  

3397 of 2010 arising out of SLP(C) No. 11430 of 2010  

who claims to be a purchaser for value without notice  

has also made a claim to the property claimed by Vijaya  

Shrivastava.  In the light of what we have held above  

endorsing the view of the Single Judge and the Division  

Bench of the High Court,  Mohd. Arshad has no claim  

against the plaintiff Vijaya Shrivastava.  Mohd. Arshad

CA Nos. 1209-1210 of 2003                                                                          4

may, accordingly, pursue such other remedies which are  

available to him with respect to the respondent Mirahul  

Enterprises or any other party.

4. We  further  direct  that  the  respondent-builder  

will execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs  

within a period of four months from today.

    ..................J      [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

    ..................J      [J.M. PANCHAL]

NEW DELHI APRIL 15, 2010.