JINESH K.V. Vs. KOCHUTHRESSIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit is one for specific performance of an agreement for sale. The plaintiff sought for an injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the Plaint schedule property. The defendant made an endorsement on the application for injunction to the effect that she has no intention to alienate the property 'till the deposit of the advance money'. The court below has by the order impugned closed the petition for temporary injunction in view of the endorsement. The prayer for return of the advance amount is only an alternative one put in by the plaintiff. The main prayer in the suit is one for specific performance of the agreement in whole. The court below should have therefore allowed the application in toto or dismissed the application in toto.

(2.) THERE is an error of jurisdiction which is apparent on the face of record. I therefore set aside the order impugned (Ext.P5). I.A.No.1392 of 2012 in O.S.No.243 of 2012 on the file of the court of the Principal Subordinate Judge of Irinjalakuda is remanded for de novo consideration. The court below shall pass a detailed order on merits after hearing either parties within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.