SICAL LOGISTICS LIMITED Vs. MARG CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Original Side Appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent r/w Order XXXVI and Rule 9 of O.S. Rules, praying to set aside the order dated 30.10.2006 made in Appln. No.2521 of 2006 in C.S.No,811 of 2004.) The appellant M/s. SICAL Logistics Limited (hereinafter referred to as "SICAL") is the first defendant in C.S.No,811 of 20o4 and the first respondent M/s. Marg Constructions Limited (hereinafter referred to as "Marg Constructions Limited") is the plaintiff in the suit.

(2.) M/s. Marg Constructions Limited is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act. SICAL and Marg Constructions Limited entered into two sale agreements dated 27.07.2004 and 02.08.2004 in respect of A & B Plaint Schedule properties. The total extent of the land covered under the agreements is 46.915 Acres situate at Sholinganallur Village. The sale consideration was Rs.19,00,000/- (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs only) per acre. Pursuant to the sale agreements, a sum of Rs.2.00 Crores was paid as advance in the form of Fixed Deposit, drawn on State Bank of India, Bazullah Road Branch, T.Nagar and the Fixed Deposit Receipt was handed over to Mr. P.B. Ramanujam, learned counsel for Marg Constructions Limited. Though Marg Constructions Limited expressed their willingness to complete the sale, SICAL failed to perform their part of contract. Hence, Marg Constructions Limited approached this Court by filing the suit for specific performance of contract of agreements of sale dated 27.07.2004 and 02.08.2004 in respect of plaint A & B Schedule Properties and for other reliefs. Along with the suit, Marg Constructions Limited also filed an application for grant of interim injunction restraining SICAL from entering, alienating, leasing or developing or handing over possession of the scheduled mentioned properties in favour of any third party. The said application was dismissed by the single Judge and the Original Side Appeal preferred as against the said order was also dismissed and ultimately the Special Leave Petition at the instance of Marg Constructions Limited was also dismissed.

(3.) WHILE the Original Side Appeal is pending Marg Constructions Limited took out an application in M.P.No,2 of 2008 seeking direction to implead one M/s. Haciendaa Infotech Realtors (P) Limited as the 6th defendant in the suit and consequently permit them to carry out the consequential amendment. The very same company also took out another application viz., M.P.No,3 of 2008 seeking further amendment of the plaint in the suit, while M/s. Haciendaa Infotech Realtors (P) Limited took out applications viz., M.P.No. 4 of 2008 seeking interim order of injunction restraining SICAL as well as Marg Constructions Limited from in any manner dealing with the plaint B Schedule Property pending disposal of the suit and M.P.No,5 of 2008 seeking direction to exempt the lands forming part of the plaint A-Schedule transaction between themselves and SICAL from the rigours of section 52 fo the Transfer of Property Act.