MOHAMMAD IQBALBHAI ABDULKARIM Vs. CHHAGANBHAI SHAMBHUBHAI RADADIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein has filed this Appeal being aggrieved by the order dtd. 29/6/2019 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mandvi, Surat below Exh-5 in Special Civil Suit No. 262 of 2016, whereby Notice of Motion application preferred by the respondent herein has been partly allowed whereby the part interim injunction application filed by the respondent, came to be partly allowed restraining the appellant from selling, transferring or creating any kind of encumbrances on the suit land property. The appellant is a defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff before the trial Court. For the brevity and convenience, the parties are referred in this matter as per the character assigned to them before the trial Court.

(2.) The plaintiff has filed the suit against the defendant- appellant for specific performance of contract as well as permanent injunction on the ground that there was an agreement to sell entered into between the parties way back in the year 2008. It is alleged that the plaintiff has paid almost Rs.15.00 lakh out of Rs.1,11,96,000.00 and odd amount. It is alleged that the defendant had to get the title cleared within 40 days from the date of execution of the Agreement to Sell and at that time, the plaintiff to pay the remaining amount as agreed between the parties. It is alleged by the plaintiff that he was ready and willing to perform his part of Contract and had repeatedly call upon the respondent to execute the sale-deed but they were asking huge amount over and above the consideration prices and not ready to perform their part of the Contract. It is alleged that it has come to the knowledge of the plaintiff that the respondents are trying to create third party in the Suit land and, therefore, he ahs prayed the Court for relief of specific performance as well as declaration of permanent injunction as well as for interim injunction during the pendency of the Suit. It was one of the grounds that the possession was handed over to the plaintiff at the time of execution of agreement to sell.

(3.) Heard Mr. R.S. Sanjanwala, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Tarak Damani, learned advocate for the appellant- defendant and Mr. Dhaval Barot, learned counsel for the plaintiff- respondent through video-conferencing.