D SRINIVASAN Vs. REVERENT J JAI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants herein are the respondents in I.A.No.36 of 2009 and the defendants 2 to 6 in the suit in O.S.No.32 of 2009, on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court (Fast Track Court), Vellore. The first respondent is the petitioner in I.A.No.36 of 2009 and the plaintiff in O.S.No.32 of 2009. The second respondent is the first respondent in I.A.No.36 of 2009 and the first defendant in O.S.No.32 of 2009. The first respondent/plaintiff has filed an Interlocutory Application in I.A.No.36 of 2009 praying to grant an order of temporary injunction restraining the respondents, their agents, servants etc. from putting up any construction over the schedule mentioned property or any portions thereof till the disposal of the suit under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 and 151 C.P.C.

(2.) The short facts of the case are as follows: The first respondent/plaintiff entered into a sale agreement with the second respondent/first defendant on 09.07.1998 to purchase a land, measuring an extent of 20 Cents in Survey No.147/2 of Sathuvacheri Village, Vellore Taluk. At the time of sale agreement, the plaintiff paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- as an advance. As per agreement, the plaintiff approached the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Vellore, for execution of sale deed as per the sale agreement dated 09.07.1998. Along with the suit, the first respondent/plaintiff sought an interim injunction restraining the appellants/respondents/defendants from interfering with the suit property. In the said suit as well as the injunction application, the appellants/defendants had filed a counter statements and written statements and resisted the claim of the plaintiff.

(3.) The learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Vellore was pleased to grant an interim injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the said rights of the petitioner/plaintiff, as per Ex.P1, agreement, with respect to the suit property. Further, the learned Judge ordered that the respondents or any other persons are not entitled to carry out any sort of construction over the suit property and that if any person interferes with the property, the petitioner/plaintiff will be at liberty to approach the Police Station to prevent such activity. Accordingly, the interim order was granted till the disposal of the suit.