SHIDDAPPA Vs. MAHADEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal the plaintiff is aggrieved by the order rejecting his application seeking temporary injunction against the defendants. The suit in O.S.No.58/2017 is one for specific performance of contract. The plaintiff claims that he entered into an agreement for sale on 6/7/2015 to purchase the suit schedule property from defendants No.1 to 3. He claims that Rs.16.00 lakhs is the consideration amount agreed, and he has paid Rs.80,000.00. The plaintiff also claimed that he is in possession of the property pursuant to the agreement for sale.

(2.) The suit was resisted by the defendants. Defendants No.1 and 3 admitted that they have entered into an agreement for sale. However, they disputed the claim of the plaintiff that he is in possession of the property. Defendant No.2 disputed the agreement for sale and took a specific stand that defendant No.2 is not a party to the agreement for sale. Defendants also raised a contention that the document is not properly stamped and the document is unregistered as such no relief can be granted based on the said document.

(3.) The trial Court after considering the rival contentions, rejected the application on the premise that the document is not properly stamped and not registered.