BOLLINENI DEVLOPERS LTD. Vs. K.SAILENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed to revoke the leave granted by this Court to institute the suit in Application No.1700 of 2013.

(2.) The brief averments of the petition is as follows :

(3.) The suit property is located outside the jurisdiction of this Court. The agreement dated 30.06.2008 between the fourth respondent and the plaintiffs show that the vacant possession shall be delivered at the time of execution of the sale deed. Now, the suit has been filed on the basis that the possession of the property has already been handed over on the basis of the subsequent payment made by the plaintiff herein. According to the applicant, the endorsement dated 04.08.2008 and 26.08.2008 were prepared on the same day and the payment admittedly stated to have been made before the agreement for sale have been manipulated and fabricated after commencing of the arbitration proceedings for the purpose of this case. Thus, the plaintiff has been put in possession of the property pursuant to a valid contract as alleged by the plaintiff. Even if the person seems to be in possession as per Act 48 of 2001, such agreement is required to be registered, in the absence of possession has not been delivered pursuant to the agreement for sale dated 30.06.2008 perse false. It is the further contention of the applicant that the suit itself ought to have been filed on 29.06.2011. Hence, the suit itself is barred by limitation. The agreement of the sale is subject to the rights of the second defendant. The plaintiff who is seeking the relief of specific performance of the contract, in effect seeking control over the immovable property which is admittedly located outside the jurisdiction. Hence, it is the contention of the applicant that since the suit property is situated outside the jurisdiction of this Court, and falls within the jurisdiction of Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District, this suit is not maintainable before this Court. Hence, the leave granted by this Court in A.No.1700 of 2013 dated 09.04.2013 has to be revoked.