SABH INFRASCTRUCTURES LTD Vs. JAY SHREE BAGLEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Plaintiff has filed CS (OS) No. 2169/2009 praying for Specific Performance and injunction pertaining to immovable property bearing No. B-35, Friends colony (West), New Delhi by virtue of a Collaboration Agreement and the memorandum of Understanding (Mou) entered into between the parties on 11. 9. 2007. In terms of this Agreement, a sum of Rupees 21,00,000/- had been paid by the Plaintiff/appellant to the Defendant/respondent. The Collaboration agreement envisaged that upon completion of construction on the plot of land, the Plaintiff would be owners of the basement, Ground Floor with Front Lawn and Rear Courtyard, Second Floor along with Terrace over the entire Second Floor, two servant quarters with common w. C. on the top terrace, two car parking spaces in the driveway, use of common areas, facilities and services. The Defendants were entitled to the title and possession of the First Floor together with a sum of Rupees 2. 25 crores. The plaint asserts that the Defendant has committed willful breach of the collaboration Agreement and the Mou. The Plaintiff has quantified the damages at Rupees 3. 5 crores.

(2.) THE Plaint discloses that the property has not been converted from leasehold to freehold and possession thereof has not been handed-over to the Plaintiff. In other words, the construction has not progressed beyond the initial payment/receipt of Rupees 21,00,000/ -.

(3.) MR. Sethi, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant, had pressed the interim injunction prayed for which was for restraining the defendant from transferring, selling, disposing off, alienating, encumbering or parting with possession or creating any third party interest in the suit property. The learned Single Judge has also noted the argument of learned counsel for the Defendant that the suit was not maintainable inasmuch as a collaboration or building of agreement or Mou is not enforceable and, therefore, the suit itself was not maintainable. Nevertheless, even in the face of this submission made by learned counsel for the Defendant, the learned Single Judge has directed the Defendant not to create any third party interest in the suit property, subject, however, to the Plaintiff depositing the remaining consideration of Rupees 1,74,00,000/ -.