Vijender Singh Malik, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision petition brought by the Defendant Kaushalya Devi under the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the judgment dated 10.5.2011 (Annexure P2) passed by Additional District Judge, Patiala, upholding the order dated 8.1.2009 (Annexure P1) passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Samana, whereby the application of Parkash Chand, Plaintiff -respondent under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure has been allowed.
(2.) PARKASH Chand, Plaintiff has filed a suit for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 17.4.2008, executed by the Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff for sale of the residential property detailed in the headnote of the plaint. He had also sought the relief of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant from alienating the said house in any manner to any one except the Plaintiff. The Defendant had taken some objections to the claim of the Plaintiff. According to her, no agreement was executed by her in favour of the Plaintiff in respect of the house in question. She has claimed that she purchased the house in question from Niranjan Dass on 10.12.1996 and had let out the same to the Plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 3,000/ - per month by virtue of rent note dated 17.12.1996. The Plaintiff did not pay rent after 1.6.1998 and, consequently, eviction was sought of the Plaintiff which was allowed. The possession of the property was delivered to the Defendant on 11.12.2007. The Plaintiff forged the agreement of sale dated 17.4.2008 and tried to take forcible possession of the house in question, for which proceedings under Sections 107/151 of Code of Criminal Procedure were initiated, which were pending before Sub Divisional Magistrate, Samana. On coming to know of the alleged agreement of sale dated 17.4.2008, the Defendant has filed an application before Deputy Superintendent of Police, Samana.
(3.) CONSIDERING the rival pleadings of the parties and the documents on record, learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Samana, found a prima facie case in favour of the Plaintiff and noticing that balance of convenience is in favour of the Plaintiff and that he shall suffer irreparable loss by litigating against the third person, allowed the application and restrained the Defendant from alienating the suit property in any manner in favour of any one, except the Plaintiff till disposal of the suit.;