Delhi High Court – Orders
M/S Alok Developers Pvt Ltd vs Miss Jasvinder Kaur @ Pinky on 26 February, 2026
$~78
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 182/2026 & I.A. 5437/2026, I.A. 5438/2026, I.A. 5439/2026,
I.A. 5440/2026
M/S ALOK DEVELOPERS PVT LTD. .....Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Jeevesh Nagrath, Mr. Vivek
Singh, Ms. Kirti Mewar and Ms. Kriti
Sharma, Advocates
Mob: 7204073750
Email: [email protected]
versus
MISS JASVINDER KAUR @ PINKY .....Defendant
Through: Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Sr. Advocate
with Mr. Moni Cinmoy, Mr. Aman
Dhyani and Mr. Somya Gupta,
Advocates
Mob: 9868088168
Email: [email protected]
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
ORDER
% 26.02.2026
I.A. 5438/2026 & I.A. 5439/2026 (For Exemptions)
1. Exemptions allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. Applications are disposed of.
I.A. 5440/2026 (Seeking permission to file and rely upon Video
Recordings)
3. The present application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff under
Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC“) seeking leave to file
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 1 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
documents in a CD/USB drive.
4. In terms of Rule 24 of Chapter-XI of the Delhi High Court (Original
Side) Rules, 2018, it is made clear that electronic records can be received in
CD/DVD/Medium, encrypted with a hash value. The said Rule is extracted
as below:
“24. Reception of electronic evidence – A party seeking to tender any
electronic record shall do so in a CD/ DVD/ Medium, encrypted with
a hash value, the details of which shall be disclosed in a separate
memorandum, signed by the party in the form of an affidavit. This will
be tendered along with the encrypted CD/ DVD/ Medium in the
Registry. The electronic record in the encrypted CD/ DVD/ Medium
will be uploaded on the server of the Court by the Computer Section
and kept in an electronic folder which shall be labeled with the cause
title, case number and the date of document uploaded on the server.
Thereafter, the encrypted CD/ DVD/ Medium will be returned to the
party on the condition that it shall be produced at the time of
admission/denial of the documents and as and when directed by the
Court/ Registrar. The memorandum disclosing the hash value shall be
separately kept by the Registry on the file. The compliance with this
rule will not be construed as dispensing with the compliance with any
other law for the time being in force including Section 65B of the
Indian Evidence Act, 1872.”
5. Accordingly, Registry may receive electronic record in a CD/DVD, so
long as it is encrypted with a hash value or in any other non-editable format.
Let the CD/DVD containing the documents, be placed in the electronic
record of the present suit.
6. Accordingly, the present application is allowed and the plaintiff is
allowed to place the documents in a CD/DVD.
7. With the aforesaid directions, the present application is disposed of.
CS(OS) 182/2026 & I.A. 5437/2026
8. The present suit has been filed seeking declaration, specific
performance, permanent and mandatory injunction and consequential reliefs
in respect of the property bearing No. 46-A, Housing Society, South
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 2 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
Extension Part-I, New Delhi.
9. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiff submits that the
plaintiff had entered into agreement with the defendant vide Agreement
dated 01st November, 2021, registered on 02nd November, 2021, for the
purposes of development of the suit property.
10. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiff submits that under
the principal Agreement dated 01st November, 2021, the allocation of
constructed areas was clearly demarcated. The defendant became entitled to
the ground floor and second floor (without roof rights), along with
proportionate undivided share in the land, while the plaintiff became entitled
to the first floor and third floor with full terrace and basement rights, along
with proportionate undivided share in the land.
11. Further, the plaintiff agreed to pay Rs. 26,00,000/- to the defendant
and to bear the entire cost of redevelopment, including, the statutory dues.
12. It is submitted that pursuant thereto, the defendant executed a Special
Power of Attorney (“SPA”) dated 01st November, 2021 and a Will dated
02nd November, 2021 in favour of the plaintiff. Thereafter, a Supplementary
Agreement dated 01st December, 2021 was executed, modifying the
allocation of rights.
13. It is submitted that under the Supplementary Agreement, the
defendant became entitled to the entire ground floor with 22.5% undivided
share in land, while the plaintiff became entitled to the first, second and third
floors, with basement and terrace rights and 77.5% undivided share in the
land.
14. It is submitted that the plaintiff agreed to pay an additional sum of Rs.
40,00,000/- by way of the Supplementary Agreement and to bear the rent of
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 3 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
alternative accommodation for the defendant during redevelopment. In
furtherance of this Supplementary Agreement, the defendant executed
various documents in favour of the plaintiff, including, a General Power of
Attorney (“GPA”) dated 09th February, 2022 and a fresh SPA.
15. Subsequently, it is submitted that the plaintiff undertook
redevelopment and completed approximately 80% of the construction.
However, thereafter, disputes arose between the parties and the defendant
unilaterally executed Cancellation Deeds dated 08th July, 2022 and 21st
February, 2023, thereby, cancelling the aforesaid GPA, SPA and Will
executed in favour of the plaintiff.
16. Attention of this Court has been drawn to the common order dated
22nd February, 2023 passed by this Court in ARB.P. 200/2023 and
OMP(I)(COMM) 54/2023, filed by the plaintiff herein, to submit that the
defendant was restrained from creating any third-party interest in the first,
second and third floors, as well as the terrace and basement. The disputes
were thereafter referred to arbitration on 06th August, 2024, and the
aforesaid interim protection was reiterated by the Sole Arbitrator vide order
dated 20th February, 2025 vide order dated 20th February, 2025.
17. However, vide order dated 03rd February, 2026, the learned Sole
Arbitrator allowed the defendant’s application under Section 16 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act“), granting liberty
to the plaintiff to pursue remedies before the Competent Court.
18. Thus, the present suit has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff.
19. Per contra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the defendant, on
advance notice, submits that plaintiff has pleaded certain cash transactions in
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 4 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
the present matter, which need to be referred to the Income Tax Department,
in terms of the directions of the Supreme Court.
20. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the defendant further submits
that the defendant, by registered Sale Deeds dated 20th February, 2026 and
23rd February, 2026, has sold the first floor, second floor and basement of
the suit property.
21. Learned Senior Counsel for the defendant further submits that third
floor, along with terrace rights, has not been sold to anyone.
22. In response, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiff
submits that the plaintiff is in possession of the basement, first floor and
second floor of the suit property and that the Sale Deeds, executed by the
defendant are fraudulent. He submits that the basement, first floor and
second floor of the suit property are under lock and key of the plaintiff,
including, the third floor and terrace.
23. However, the aforesaid facts, including, the cash transactions are
denied and disputed by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the defendant.
24. Accordingly, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let
the plaint be registered as suit.
25. Issue summons. Summons is accepted by learned counsel appearing
for the defendant.
26. Let written statement be filed by the defendant, within thirty (30) days
from today. Along with the written statement, the defendant shall also file an
affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the plaintiff, without
which, the written statement shall not be taken on record.
27. Liberty is given to the plaintiff to file replication, if any, within thirty
(30) days from the receipt of the written statement. Along with the
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 5 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
replication filed by the plaintiff, the affidavit of admission/denial of the
documents of defendant be filed by the plaintiff, without which, the
replication shall not be taken on record.
28. It is made clear that any unjustified denial of documents may lead to
an order of costs against the concerned party.
29. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of the documents, the
same shall be sought and given within the timelines.
30. This Court notes the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of
Correspondence, RBANMS Educational Institution Versus B.
Gunashekar and Another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 793, wherein, the
Supreme Court has directed as follows:
“xxx xxx xxx
18.1. Further, through the averments made in the plaint and in the
agreement, the respondents/plaintiffs have claimed to have paid huge sum
towards consideration by cash. It is pertinent to recall that Section 269ST of
the Income Tax Act, was introduced to curb black money by digitalising the
transactions above Rs. 2,00,000/- and contemplating equal amount of
penalty under Section 271DA of the Act. As per the said provisions, action is
to be taken on the recipient. However, there is also an onus on the plaintiffs
to disclose their source for such huge cash. The Central Government thought
it fit to cap the cash transactions and move forwards towards digital
economy to curb the dark economy which has a drastic effect on the
economy of the country. It will be useful to refer to the Budget Speech during
the introduction of the Finance Bill, 2017 and the extract of the memo
presented with the Finance Bill, 2017, which lay down the object:
Budget Speech:
“VII. DIGITAL ECONOMY
111. Promotion of a digital economy is an integral part of Government’s
strategy to clean the system and weed out corruption and black money.
It has a transformative impact in terms of greater formalisation of the
economy and mainstreaming of financial savings into the banking
system. This, in turn, is expected to energise private investment in the
country through lower cost of credit. India is now on the cusp of a
massive digital revolution.
…..
Promoting Digital Economy
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 6 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
162. The Special Investigation Team (SIT) set up by the Government for
black money has suggested that no transaction above Rs. 3 lakh should
be permitted in cash. The Government has decided to accept this
proposal. Suitable amendment to the Income-tax Act is proposed in the
Finance Bill for enforcing this decision.”
Extract from Memo of Finance Bill, 2017
“Restriction on cash transactions
In India, the quantum of domestic black money is huge which adversely
affects the revenue of the Government creating are source crunch for its
various welfare programmes. Black money is generally transacted in
cash and large amount of unaccounted wealth is stored and used in form
of cash.
In order to achieve the mission of the Government to move towards a
less cash economy to reduce generation and circulation of black money,
it is proposed to insert section 269ST in the Act to provide that no
person shall receive an amount of three lakh rupees or more,–
(a) in aggregate from a person in a day;
(b) in respect of a single transaction; or
(c) in respect of transactions relating to one event or occasion from a
person, otherwise than by an account payee cheque or account payee
bank draft or use of electronic clearing system through a bank account.
It is further proposed to provide that the said restriction shall not apply
to Government, any banking company, post office, savings bank or co-
operative bank. Further, it is proposed that such other persons or class of
persons or receipts may be notified by the Central Government, for reasons
to be recorded in writing, on whom the proposed restriction on cash
transactions shall not apply. Transactions of the nature referred to in section
269SS are proposed to be excluded from the scope of the said section.
It is also proposed to insert new section 271DA in the Act to provide for
levy of penalty on a person who receives a sum in contravention of the
provisions of the proposed section 269ST. The penalty is proposed to be a
sum equal to the amount of such receipt. The said penalty shall however not
be levied if the person proves that there were good and sufficient reasons for
such contravention. It is also proposed that any such penalty shall be levied
by the Joint Commissioner.
It is also proposed to consequentially amend the provisions of section
206C to omit the provision relating to tax collection at source at the rate of
one per cent. of sale consideration on cash sale of jewellery exceeding five
lakh rupees.
These amendments will take effect from 1st April 2017.”
However, when the Bill was passed, the permissible limit was capped
under Rupees Two Lakhs, instead of the proposed Rupees Three Lakhs.
When a suit is filed claiming Rs. 75,00,000/- paid by cash, not only does is
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 7 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
create a suspicion on the transaction, but also displays, a violation of law.
Though the amendment has come into effect from 01.04.2017, we find from
the present litigation that the same has not brought the desired change.
When there is a law in place, the same has to be enforced. Most times, such
transactions go unnoticed or not brought to the knowledge of the income tax
authorities. It is settled position that ignorance in fact is excusable but not
the ignorance in law. Therefore, we deem it necessary to issue the following
directions:
(A) Whenever, a suit is filed with a claim that Rs. 2,00,000/- and above
is paid by cash towards any transaction, the courts must intimate the
same to the jurisdictional Income Tax Department to verify the
transaction and the violation of Section 269ST of the Income Tax Act,
if any,
(B) Whenever, any such information is received either from the court
or otherwise, the Jurisdictional Income Tax authority shall take
appropriate steps by following the due process in law,
(C) Whenever, a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- and above is claimed to be paid
by cash towards consideration for conveyance of any immovable
property in a document presented for registration, the jurisdictional
Sub-Registrar shall intimate the same to the jurisdictional Income Tax
Authority who shall follow the due process in law before taking any
action,
(D) Whenever, it comes to the knowledge of any Income Tax Authority
that a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- or above has been paid by way of
consideration in any transaction relating to any immovable property
from any other source or during the course of search or assessment
proceedings, the failure of the registering authority shall be brought to
the knowledge of the Chief Secretary of the State/UT for initiating
appropriate disciplinary action against such officer who failed to
intimate the transactions.
xxx xxx xxx”
(Emphasis Supplied)
31. It is to be noted that the averments with regard to the cash transactions
have been made in Paras 16 and 17 of the plaint, which are reproduced as
under:
“xxx xxx xxx
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 8 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
xxx xxx xxx”
32. Further, the plaintiff has also attached a document pertaining to the
cash transaction, which is reproduced as under:
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 9 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
33. Considering the judgment of the Supreme Court and the aforesaid
facts as pleaded in the plaint, the cash transactions are required to be verified
by the Income Tax Department.
34. Accordingly, the plaintiff is directed to file on affidavit the details of
the Assessing Officer (“AO”), PAN Number, along with the last Income Tax
Return (“ITR”) of the plaintiff.
35. Keeping in view the mandate of the Supreme Court, issue notice to
the AO of the plaintiff, to verify the cash transactions pleaded by the
plaintiff, as reproduced hereinabove. The AO of the plaintiff shall submit a
Verification Report before this Court within eight weeks.
36. The plaintiff is directed to remain present before the concerned AO in
this regard, with all necessary documents, as and when called.
37. Issue notice to Standing Counsel (Income Tax), for information and
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 10 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
compliance.
38. The Registry will ensure that notice is issued to the AO as well as
Standing Counsel (Income Tax) within a period of two weeks, from today.
39. This Court takes into consideration the submission made by learned
Senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiff, as noted above, that the plaintiff
is in possession of basement, first floor, second floor and third floor along
with terrace of the suit property, which is disputed by learned Senior
Counsel for the defendant.
40. Accordingly, Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate, Enrolment No.
D/3146-A/2010, Mob: 7289854802, Email Id: [email protected],
who is present in Court, is appointed as a Local Commissioner and the
following directions are issued:
i. The Local Commissioner is directed to visit the suit property, i.e.,
property bearing No. C-46-A, Housing Society, South Extension Part-
I, New Delhi, admeasuring 200 sq. yards today itself.
ii. The learned Local Commissioner shall be accompanied by the
representatives of both the plaintiff and defendant.
iii. The representatives of both the plaintiff and defendant are directed to
carry their respective keys. They shall attempt to open the locks with
their respective keys in the presence of the Local Commissioner.
iv. The Local Commissioner shall upon such visit and inspection, file his
report, clearly recording as to with whose keys, the locks have opened
on each of the floors, i.e., basement, first floor, second floor, third
floor and the terrace.
v. For the said purpose, the Local Commissioner shall also be entitled to
take requisite photographs and file the same along with his report.
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 11 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02
vi. The fee of the Local Commissioner is fixed as Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees
Two Lacs Only), which shall be borne by the plaintiff and the
defendant, in equal proportions.
vii. The fee of the Local Commissioner shall be given by the respective
parties today itself, during the course of the day.
41. Considering the submissions made before this Court, the status quo as
regards possession and title of the third floor and terrace shall be maintained
by the parties. Further, status quo as regards the possession of the entire suit
property shall also be maintained by the parties, till the next date of hearing.
42. Issue notice in I.A. 5437/2026. Notice is accepted by learned counsel
appearing for the defendant.
43. Let reply be filed within a period of four weeks.
44. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of two weeks,
thereafter.
45. Let the report of the Local Commissioner be filed within a period of
two weeks, from today.
46. List before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 28th April, 2026.
47. List before the Court on 22nd July, 2026.
MINI PUSHKARNA, J
FEBRUARY 26, 2026
ak
CS(OS) 182/2026 Page 12 of 12
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/03/2026 at 20:38:02