Supriya Apaertments Owners … vs Gowda D S on 4 June, 2025

0
6

This suit is filed by the plaintiffs to direct the defendants to

execute a deed of sale conveying to the first plaintiff society, the

schedule ‘A’ property by way of absolute sale deed and also to

direct the defendants to execute separate sale deeds in respect

of item Nos.1 to 9 of suit ‘A’ schedule apartments in favour of

plaintiffs No.2 to 10 as per the sale deeds executed in their

favour.

2. The case of the plaintiffs in brief is as hereunder:-

The first defendant Sri D.S.Gowda is the owner of suit ‘A’

schedule property bearing No.132, 6th ‘A’ Cross, 9th Main, RMV

Extension, Sadashiva Nagar, Bangalore-80, which is described

as suit ‘A’ schedule property. He had entered into a Joint

Development Agreement dated 30.04.1981 with one Mr.K.T.

Asher, who was carrying on business under the name and style

M/s Asher and Associates. Under the said joint development

agreement, the first defendant authorised the said Mr.K.T. Asher

to develop the schedule ‘A’ property by constructing residential

apartments there on. As on the date of the joint development

agreement, the suit schedule property was consisted certain

structures and late Sri K.T. Asher was authorised to put up

additional floors on the existing structures by putting up

residential apartments. As per clause (i) of joint development

agreement, the first defendant being the owner of the schedule

property specifically authorised late Mr.K.T. Asher to sell, dispose

of and transfer the flats/apartments that may be constructed on

the property upon such terms and conditions the developer

deems fit by receiving the consideration amount. Though clause

No.11 had imposed a condition that the developer was obliged to

appropriate the sale proceeds firstly for payment of the loan

availed by the defendant No.1 by mortgaging ‘A’ schedule

property and secondly for payment of the balance amount due to

the first defendant and thereafter to share the net profits along

with the first defendant in equal share, it did not place any

restrictions on the power of late Mr.K.T. Asher to sell the flats/

apartments directly by receiving the sale proceeds. The

authorisation given by defendant No.1 included for the sale of

flats/units including car parking space. As per Clause-17, it was

agreed that the prospective buyers of the apartments should form

a co-operative society or any other body or association or Limited

company of the acquirers of the flats/units/car parking space and

the first defendant had agreed to execute the deed of conveyance

or transfer or such other document in favour of developer or the

acquirers including to the society or body or association or limited

company of acquirers. Pursuant to the joint development

agreement, Mr.K.T. Asher commenced the construction work and

had entered into nine separate sale agreements in favour of

plaintiffs No.2 to 10 on 08.05.1982, 11.01.1982, 11.03.1985,

10.10.1981, 11.10.1981, 08.10.1981, 08.06.1983, 29.05.1987

and 22.06.1984, agreeing to sell the flats No.103, 101, 102, 203,

201, 202, 303, 301 and 302 respectively in favour of plaintiffs

No.2 to 10 for the consideration amounts narrated in the plaint.



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here