ITTINA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. M. SRINIVAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF in O.S. No. 9443/2013 has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 22.6.2015 passed by the court below rejecting the application filed by him under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC.

(2.) PLAINTIFF is a private Limited Co., incorporated under the provisions of Indian Companies Act 1956. It has filed a suit seeking decree of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant or any other person claiming under him from interfering, taking forcible possession of plaintiff's lawful possession over the property and also from dismantling or removing the compound wall with its gate provided to the property. Along with the plaint, an application seeking temporary injunction to restrain defendant from interfering or taking physical possession of plaintiff's lawful possession of the suit property, was filed. The application was resisted. The court below has dismissed the application. Hence, present Miscellaneous First appeal has been filed.

(3.) DEFENCE of the defendant discloses that, though execution of the sale deed is not denied, but, receipt of consideration of Rs. 1,25,77,000/ - has been denied. According to defendant, plaintiff had assured him that they would pay money in a sum of Rs. 2,00,00,000/ - after the litigations regarding the property had been completed and that defendant being innocent, believing the representations made by the plaintiff, entered into an agreement during the year 2003 by receiving only a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/ - as advance. It is further contended that having full faith in the plaintiff, he was induced to sign the pleadings in support of plaintiff's Company and induced to execute the sale deed. It is also contended that possession of the property remained with defendant.