VINOD SALUJA Vs. SITA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of the application of the plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 for the grant of an ad-interim order of injunction restraining the defendant from selling, transferring, alienating or creating third party rights in property being House No.N-1, Green Park Extension, New Delhi. Facts, in short, giving rise to the present suit are that : -

(2.) By an agreement alleged to have been entered into between the plaintiffs and the defendants on 15th September, 1994, the defendant had agreed to sell the terrace rights of the property bearing No.N-1, Green Park Extension, New Delhi to the plaintiffs for a total consideration of Rs.48 lakhs. The agreement is in the form of a receiptcum- agreement on a paper of an exercise book. The defendant has signed on the back side of the said paper on the revenue receipt and the same has been witnessed by the son of the defendant. Certain other documents, namely, affidavit/undertaking, affidavit for submission of building plans, indemnity bond, letter of authority for architect and certain forms for submission to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and the Ministry of Urban Development, were also signed by the defendant. All these documents are typed. While the agreement is on a paper of an exercise book, affidavits, undertaking and the indemnity bond are on the stamp papers and have been duly attested by a notary. All these documents bear date of 20th September, 1994. A sum of Rs.21,000.00 was paid by the plaintiffs to the defendant at the time of signing of the agreement. The son of the defendant expired on October 5, 1994. On the defendant not taking steps for execution of the sale deed in respect of the terrace rights of the property, the plaintiff Filed this suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 15th September, 1994. Alongwith the suit, an application for injunction restraining the defendants from selling, transferring, alienating or creating any third party rights in the property in suit was also filed.

(3.) Defendant has filed the written statement and reply to the application. The case of the defendant is that she is an illiterate widow and has no male member to look after her. It is stated that after the death of her husband and elder son, her younger son Vinod Babuta fell into bad company and taking advantage of the bad habits of her son and by offering him liquor and other luxuries of life, the plaintiffs allured him to get the signatures of her mother on some documents and provided them photocopies of the documents of the property. Vinod Babuta had been pestering the defendant for money all the time. He, therefore, allegedly pressurised the defendant to enter into a collaboration agreement with a firm of the plaintiffs known as Posh Wears Private Limited, E- 29, Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi. It was under threat of her son that the defendant agreed to enter into a collaboration agreement and a sum of Rs.21,000.00 was paid to her by Shri Vinod Babuta on behalf of the said M/s.Posh Wears Private Limited of which plaintiff No. 1 is one of the Directors. It is stated that she was made to sign certain papers on the clear understanding that the said papers were required for collaboration agreement which the partics had agreed to enter. She was also made to sign a blank paper on which the plaintiffs had now prepared the agreement to sell. After about 15 days of the said agreement, her son died and, therefore, the deal of collaboration could not be Finalised. It is stated that the plaintiffs are trying to take advantage of the pathetic condition of the defendant.