KAMALAMMA Vs. A VIVEKANANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is listed for admission. The respondent though served has remained absent. In view of the question raised by the appellants, the appeal is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) This appeal is by the defendants in o.s.No.650/2015 on the file of the XL Additional City Civil and sessions Judge, (for short 'the learned Civil Court') . The appellants are aggrieved by the impugned order dated 3.3.2016 insofar as rejection of I.A.3 filed by the appellants under section 151 of the code of Civil Procedure.

(3.) The plaintiff-respondent commenced suit in O.S.No.6507/2015 for permanent injunction in respect of property bearing No.228, Malagala Layout, Nagarabhavi I Stage, Bengaluru ('subject property') asserting that the BDA allotted the subject property to the appellant No.2. BDA transferred absolute title to the appellant No.2 under sale deed dated 19.2.2013. The appellant No.2 approached the plaintiff-respondent offering to sell the subject property to discharge the loan the appellant No.2 ad availed from a certain Shivakumar. The plaintiff respondent No.2 paid a sum of Rs.24.00 lakhs out of the total consideration of Rs.25.00 lakhs for the purchase of the subject property; in consideration of receipt of this amount, the appellant No.2 executed a power of attorney and sale agreement. Subsequently, the appellant No.2 approached the plaintiff-respondent requesting the plaintiff respondent not to initiate suit for specific performance and that he would execute sale deed transferring the subject property in performance of the sale agreement. Later, at the instance of the appellant No.2, plaintiff respondent secured authentication of the power of attorney and execution of sale deed dated 10.7.2015 in his favour incurring huge cost towards stamp duty and registration fee.