..1..          Reg.Civil Suit No.78/2021
                                                            ( Sushil Jadhav & anr. V/s. Laxman Salunkhe )
MHTH120011542021

                                    Presented on  : 05.02.2021         
Registered on : 05.02.2021         
Decided on     : 06.05.2022
                                                   Duration        : 01Y.03M.01D      

IN THE COURT OF  CIVIL JUDGE (J.D.), VASHI, NAVI
MUMBAI.
 AT  :  C.B.D., BELAPUR, DISTRICT­THANE
                     ( Presided over by Smt.T.M.Deshmukh­Naik)

 
                                               Regular   Civil Suit No.78/2021
              
                                               Exhibit No. 24   

1.  Mr. Sushi Chandrakant Jadhav,
Age : 33 Years, Occ. : Service,
R/at : Flat No. B­101, 
1st Floor, Balaji Complex, 
Building No.01, 
Nandivali Road, Dombivili (E), 
Thane – 421201.

2.  Mrs. Manda Sushil Jadhav,
Age : 28 Years, Occ. : Housewife,
R/at : Flat No. B­101, 
1st Floor, Balaji Complex, 
Building No.01, 
                                             ..2..          Reg.Civil Suit No.78/2021
                                                            ( Sushil Jadhav & anr. V/s. Laxman Salunkhe )
Nandivali Road, Dombivili (E), 
Thane – 421201.                         … Plaintiffs.

V/s.

Mr. Laxman Dnyanoba Salunkhe,
Also Known as Mr. Laxan Dnyanu Salunkhe, 
Age : Adult, 
Currently R/at : Room No. 08, 
Building No. D­07­1, 
Shri Saikrupa C.H.S. Ltd., 
Plot No. 283, Sector – 23, 
Juinagar, Navi Mumbai – 400705.
Also having address ­ 
Flat No. 02, Saraswati C.H.S. Ltd., 
Gat No. 26, Palidevad, 
Sukapur, Near Bhagat Wadi (Prem Nagar),
Taluka – Panvel, District – Raigad, 
Pin – 401206.          … Defendant.
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
   APPEARANCE :­           
  Counsel for  Plaintiffs       :  Adv. Smt. Apeksha A. Pilane.
  Counsel for Defendant :  In Person.
 ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ 
                                         : J U D G M E N T :
                        (Delivered on this 06th day of May, 2022)

1. The present suit is filed for recovery of an amount of
Rs.2,00,000/­ alongwith compensation of Rs.1,00,000/­.

2. Brief facts giving rise to this suit are stated as below :­
Plaintiffs   were   in   search   of   house   in   Juinagar,   Navi
Mumbai.     One   of   the   friend   of   plaintiff   Mr.   Shankar   Mane
introduced   defendant   to   plaintiff   and   informed   that   defendant
wants to sell out his flat for total consideration of Rs.35,60,000/­.
Accordingly,   in   the   month   of   May   –   2019   Memorandum   of
Understanding   (MOU) executed between plaintiff and defendant
                                             ..3..          Reg.Civil Suit No.78/2021
                                                            ( Sushil Jadhav & anr. V/s. Laxman Salunkhe )
for   total   consideration   of   Rs.35,60,000/­.     Accordingly,   plaintiff
paid some amount.   Payment for the flat is described as under in
MOU :­
a)   Rs.   75,000/­   have   been   paid   by   way   of   cheque   bearing   no.
068281   dated   09.04.2019   of   Navi   Mumbai   Co­operative   Bank,
Juinagar Branch, towards Advance / Token Payment.

b)  Rs. 25,000/­ have been paid by way of Cash on 01.04.2019.

c)     Rs.   6,25,000/­   will   be   paid   by   way   of   cheque   on   or   before

execution and registration of agreement for sale before The Sub­
Registrar of assurance.

d)  A sum of Rs.35,000/­ will be paid by way of Cash.

e)     Balance   amount   of   Rs.   28,00,000/­   will   be   paid   by   way   of

obtaining   housing   loan   or   any   financial   assistance   from   any
Bank / Financial Institutions. 

3. Plaintiffs   have   paid   to   defendant   an   amount   of   Rs.2

Lakhs as a token of part payment in following manner :­

a)   Rs.   75,000/­   have   been   paid   by   way   of   cheque   bearing   no.

068281   dated   09.04.2019   of   Navi   Mumbai   Co­operative   Bank,
Juinagar Branch.

b)  Rs. 25,000/­ have been paid by way of Cash on 01.04.2019.

c)  Rs. 1,00,000/­ have been paid by way of Cash on 20.05.2019
through Mr. Suresh Mane on behalf of the Plaintiffs.
                                             ..4..          Reg.Civil Suit No.78/2021
                                                            ( Sushil Jadhav & anr. V/s. Laxman Salunkhe )
4. Accordingly,   plaintiffs  have  mentioned   and  filed   bank
statements of their account in Navi Mumbai Co­operative Bank,
Juinagar   Branch.     It   is   stated   that,   Mr.   Shankar   Mane   ,   Mr.
Suresh Mane and Mr. Dhanaji Kadam were the witnesses of above
transaction.  After the payment of the above mentioned amount of
Rs.2 Lakhs plaintiffs were making arrangement of the remaining
payment   but   one   day   all   of   a   sudden,   defendant   informed   the
plaintiffs that he had sold out above­mentioned flat i.e. B­3/0:4,
Shri.   Gajanan   C.H.S.   Ltd.,   Plot   No.   276,   Sector  –  23,   Juinagar,
Sanpada,   Navi   Mumbai   to   another   person.     Defendant   also
informed plaintiff that he is not interested to proceed with the said
transaction of the plaintiff.

5. Thereafter, plaintiffs got shocked due to the decision of
the defendant.   However, they requested the defendant to repay
amount   of   Rs.   2   Lakhs   which   they   had   paid   as   token   amount.
However, defendant refused to pay.   Hence, plaintiffs had issued
legal demand notice dated 10.09.2020 to the defendant by RPAD.
Inspite   of   receipt   of   the   notice   defendant   again   failed   to   repay.
Hence, considering the conduct of defendant to intentionally delay
the repayment, plaintiff had instituted this suit. 

6. After   receipt   of   summons,   defendant   appeared   before

the court, however, he failed to file written statement.  Hence, no
say   and   no   written   statement   order   was   passed   against   the
defendant.  

7. Considering   the   pleadings   of   plaintiffs   ,     following

Issues arise for my determination and I have recorded my findings
thereto for the reasons stated as under :­
                                             ..5..          Reg.Civil Suit No.78/2021
                                                            ( Sushil Jadhav & anr. V/s. Laxman Salunkhe )
SR.
ISSUES FINDINGS
NO.

1 Whether the plaintiffs prove that they are
entitled   for   recovery   of   Rs.2   Lakhs   …  Partly  In   the
alongwith   compensation   of   Rs.1   Lakh affirmative.
from the defendant ?      
2 What Order and Decree ?    …  Suit is  partly
decreed   with
costs.
                                          : R E A S O N S :

Oral evidence of Plaintiff :­
Mr. Sushil Chandrakant Jadhav ­ P.W.No.1 examined  at Exh.10.
Mrs. Manda Sushil Jadhav ­ P.W.No.2 examined  at Exh.11.
Mr. Dhanaji Vitthal Kadam ­ P.W.No.3 examined  at Exh.14.
Mr. Shankar Jaywant Mane ­ P.W.No.4 examined  at Exh.15.
Mr. Suresh Shankar Mane ­ P.W.No.5 examined  at Exh.16.
Documentary evidence :­
1.     Original copy of MOU,exh.18.
2.  Original Bank passbook, exh.19.
3.   Original copy of receipt dated 20.05.2019 , exh.20.
4.   Notice dated 10.09.2020, exh.21.
5.  Original reply dated 25.09.2020, exh.22. 

AS TO ISSUE NO.1 :­
8. Ld.   Counsel   for   plaintiff   submitted   that   as   per   the
contention of plaintiffs the evidence has been adduced in oral as
well   as   documentary   form.       Their     evidence   has   not   been
challenged by defendant though he had appeared before the court.
It   is   further   submitted   that   after   execution   of   MOU   defendant
                                             ..6..          Reg.Civil Suit No.78/2021
                                                            ( Sushil Jadhav & anr. V/s. Laxman Salunkhe )
suddenly changed his mind and therefore, plaintiffs got shocked
and   their   dream   and   wish   of   house   at   Juinagar   has   been
collapsed, therefore, they sustained mental injury.  After breach of
MOU defendant was duty bound to repay refund of Rs. 2 Lakhs,
however, he failed to do so and thus, plaintiffs sustained double
trauma and therefore, plaintiffs are entitled for compensation.

9. The   documents   produced   on   record   at   exh.18

supported the contention of plaintiffs regarding intention of both
the parties for agreement to sale of the house at Juinagar.  As per
contention of plaintiff, the bank statement shown payment given
to   defendant.     The   receipt   is   also   filed   on   record.     It   bears
signature   of   plaintiffs   and   witnesses   and   defendant.     Thus,   it
shows that according to MOU plaintiff had paid  Rs. 2 Lakhs  to
defendant.

10. Defendant appeared before the court, however, did not
take   efforts   to   file   written   statement   /   say   inspite   of   giving
sufficient opportunity.   Thus, the oral and documentary evidence
of plaintiff remained unchallenged and unshaken.  Thus, there is
nothing brought on record by defendant to show that he had paid
or refunded the amount received from plaintiff.   Hence, it is seen
that plaintiffs have proved their case.

11. The   facts   on   record   show   that   due   to   non­refund   of

amount,   plaintiffs   have   filed   this   suit.   Certainly   when   the   hard
earning   of   person   was   not   refundable   he   had   to   suffer   mental
trauma and also for that rightful claim when he required to file
litigation   that   person   has   to   spend   money   and   time,   therefore,
certainly mental agony is caused to a person for his right to claim.
                                             ..7..          Reg.Civil Suit No.78/2021
                                                            ( Sushil Jadhav & anr. V/s. Laxman Salunkhe )
Hence, plaintiff is also entitled for compensation.  However, in my
view   it   should   be   reasonable   and   therefore,   reasonable   and
justifiable   amount   should   be   of   Rs.50,000/­.     Hence,     I  answer
issue no.1 partly in the affirmative.

AS TO ISSUE NO.2 :
12. In   view   of   above   discussion,   I   proceed   to   pass   the
following order :

                                        : O R D E R :

1. Suit is partly decreed  with costs.

2. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover amount
of Rs.2,00,000/­ from the defendant with
interest @ 6% p.a  from date of order till
its realization.
3. Defendant   is   directed   to   pay
compensation   of   Rs.   50,000/­   after
appeal period is over.
4. A decree be drawn up accordingly.   
                
Digitally signed by
TRUPTI TRUPTI MUKUND
MUKUND DESHMUKH
NAIK
DESHMUKH
Date: 2022.05.31
NAIK 13:25:19 +0530

Vashi.        ( T.M.Deshmukh­Naik )
Date :­ 06.05.2022 .             
Civil Judge J.D., Vashi