RAVIKUMAR T. Vs. SHIVANANDAMURTHY AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff is before this Court against the order dated 24.1.2018 made in M.A. No.27/2017 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Davanagere dismissing the appeal and confirming the order passed by the trial Court dismissing the application for Temporary Injunction.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance to enforce the agreement dated 29.1.2002 and to declare that the sale deed dated 29.1.2011 executed by defendant NO.1 in favour of defendant Nos.2 and 3 is null and void and not binding on the plaintiff, contending that the defendant No.1 who is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property has executed agreement in favour of the plaintiff to sell the plaint schedule property for a total consideration of Rs.95,000/- and received Rs.30,000/- on the date of the agreement. Inspite of the repeated demands, the defendant No.1 not executed the sale deed. Therefore the plaintiff filed the suit. The 1st defendant filed the written statement and denied the plaint averments and contended that the suit filed by the plaintiff is barred by law and sought for dismissal of the suit. The defendant Nos.2 and 3 filed the written statement and denied the plaint averments and contended that they are the bonafide purchasers from the 1st defendant and sought for dismissal of the suit.

(3.) During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff filed I.A. No.3 for Temporary Injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to restrain the defendant Nos.2 and 3 from digging the land and raising any columns or foundation in the plaint schedule property, morefully described in the schedule to the plaint as well as I.A., pending disposal of the suit, reiterating the averments made in the plaint. The said application was opposed by the defendants by filing objections. The trial Court considering the application and the objections by the order dated 11.10.2017 dismissed I.A. No.3 holding that the plaintiff has not made out a prima facie case and balance of convenience in his favour for grant of Temporary Injunction. Against the said order passed by the trial Court, the plaintiff filed appeal before the lower appellate Court in M.A. No.27/2017. At the inception, the lower appellate Court granted Temporary Injunction as prayed for. After appearance of the defendants, the lower appellate Court considering the entire material on record by the impugned order dated 24.1.2018 dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the trial Court. Against the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below, the present petition is filed.