HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
B.S.VERMA, J. -
(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THIS appeal under Order 43, Rule 1(r) C.P.C. is directed against the order dated 1 -9 -2012 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division)
Haridwar in Original Suit No. 85 of 2012 Rao Juna and another Vs. Rao
Jishan and another, whereby the temporary injunction application of the
plaintiffs -respondents has been allowed and the defendant -appellants have
been restrained from interfering in the possession of the plaintiffs
property, which has been purchased by them by way of sale deed and is
also recorded in the Khatauni in their names.
(3.) ACCORDING to the appellants, one Sri Sanjay Agarwal had executed an agreement for sale in favour of the appellants in respect of
the suit property and photocopy of the document has been filed by the
defendants before the trial Court.
It is the trial Court, who will examine the validity of the agreement to sell since it is not a registered agreement and for what
purpose it can be read in evidence.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.