Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) This first miscellaneous appeal is directed against an order being No. 6 dated 14th June, 2018 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 2nd Court, Krishnanagar, Nadia in Title Suit No. 65 of 2018 at the instance of the plaintiffs/appellants.
(2.) Let us now consider as to whether the appeal deserves any merit for its admission under the provision of Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure or not.
(3.) By the impugned order, plaintiffs' prayer for temporary injunction for restraining the defendant from transferring and/or selling and/or creating any third party interest in the suit property during pendency of the suit was refused by the learned Trial Judge after a contested hearing. Such interim order was prayed for by the plaintiffs in a suit for specific performance of contract. The plaintiffs claim that they entered into an agreement for sale on 31st March, 2018 for purchasing 130 Satak of land at Mouza- 60No. Debagram, district- Nadia for a consideration of Rs.2,33,00,000/-. It is alleged by the plaintiffs that on the date of execution of the agreement by the parties, the plaintiffs paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the defendant by way of earnest money. It is further alleged that the plaintiffs agreed to pay a further sum of Rs.70,00,000/- by 30th April, 2018 and rest of the balance amount of consideration will be paid by them by 30th June, 2018. It is further alleged by the plaintiffs that though the plaintiffs tendered a sum of Rs.70,00,000/- to the defendant within the stipulated time as per the said agreement, but the defendant refused to accept the same. This created suspicion in the mind of the plaintiffs and as such, the plaintiffs have filed the suit for specific performance of contract claiming that possession of the suit premises remains with them.;