R.K. SARDAR Vs. JAFFAR SAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions are filed by the judgment-debtor against the order dated 31st January, 2017 by which the Executing Court overruled the objections raised by the judgment writer with regard to maintainability and held that the execution petition filed is maintainable before the Court at Davangere and the decree-holder was given liberty to proceed with the case and the order dated 10.3.2017 rejecting I.A. No.2 filed under section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC' for short) for review of the order dated 31.1.2017.

(2.) The respondents/plaintiffs filed O.S. No.62/2011 against the present judgment-debtor/defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/-. It is the case of the respondents/plaintiffs that the defendant has purchased the suit schedule property in public auction held by the Union Bank of India, Davangere and negotiated to sell the suit schedule property and the plaintiffs keeping in faith in defendant negotiated to purchase suit schedule property from the defendant. The sale negotiation was held on 2.1.2008 and the sale price of the suit schedule property was fixed at Rs. 36,75,000/- and the plaintiff accepted to purchase the suit schedule property and paid advance amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- to the defendant on 2.1.2008 and the sale agreement executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff on 16.1.2008 at Chitradurga. It is further contended that in spite of repeated requests, the defendant has not executed the sale deed on the ground that the Union Bank of India has not granted permission to execute the sale deed. Therefore the plaintiffs filed the suit. The defendant filed the written statement and denied the entire plaint averments. After contest, the trial Court by the judgment and decree dated 25.1.2016 decreed the suit with costs and directed the defendant to refund earnest amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- to the plaintiffs with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the suit till realization of entire decretal amount.

(3.) Against the said judgment and decree, defendant filed RFA No.882/2016 before this Court. This Court while admitting the appeal, stayed the impugned judgment and decree subject to deposit of 50% of the decretal amount within four weeks from the date of the order. Admittedly the interim order was not complied by the defendant. Therefore the interim order shall not come in the way to protect the defendant since he has failed to comply the conditional order. The interim order automatically stood vacated since it was a conditional order.