GEETA DEVI W/O DR RAJEEV KUMAR Vs. AMANA AND OTHERS
LAWS(UTN)-2013-12-137
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on December 28,2013

Geeta Devi W/O Dr Rajeev Kumar Appellant
VERSUS
Amana And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) An interim injunction application, moved by the plaintiff petitioner herein seeking temporary injunction restraining the defendants not to damage the property and not to create third party interest, was dismissed by the learned Trial Court and appeal arising therefrom was dismissed by the Appellate Court vide judgment and order dated 06.12.2013, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has knocked door of this Court by invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) The plaint was filed seeking relief for the specific performance of the contract contending that the defendants owner in possession of the property in question agreed to sell the property in question in favour of the plaintiff for Rs.10 lacs; having received, 1 lac as earnest money, from the plaintiff, an agreement to sell was got executed between the parties on 12.10.2006 and was got registered as per the provision of Indian Registration Act; as per agreement to sell, defendants had to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff or his nominee on or before 12.09.2007 after receiving balance sale consideration of Rs. 9 lacs; despite repeated requests and legal notice sent to the defendants, defendants failed to honour the registered agreement to sell in favour of the plaintiff; plaintiff had always been willing and ready to get sale deed executed in his favour on payment of balance amount of Rs. 9 lacs; when defendant failed to honour the agreement to sell, plaintiff preferred suit in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Haridwar and application seeking ad interim injunction was also moved alongwith the plaint.
(3.) Both the courts below did not agree with the plaintiff and rejected the temporary injunction application moved under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the C.P.C. and held that plaintiff could not prove that Rs. 1 lac were ever paid to the defendant as earnest money. Therefore, prima-facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss are not made out in favour of the plaintiff.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.