ARIF Vs. MOTIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the rival parties.

(2.) This appeal is preferred against the revision of interim injunction passed on 8.11.2012, by learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Nagpur, in Special Civil Suit No.153 of 2012. It appears that the appellant/plaintiff had filed the suit for specific performance of contract dated 18.10.2000 and modified on 27.2.2007. The suit property i.e. agricultural land bearing Khasara No.51 P.H. No.75 admeasuring 9.00 HR (22.50 Acres) of Mouza Sindhiwihiri, Tahsil and District Nagpur was agreed to be sold in favour of the appellant/plaintiff pursuant to the aforesaid agreement to sale the property. It is contended that the price agreed was Rs.50,000/ per acre and earnest money by way of installment in the sum of Rs.75,000/ was paid until the agreement dated 27.2.2007.

(3.) It is his grievance of the appellant/plaintiff that defendant Motiram Kodse sold the same land in favour of Shri Neelkanth Koram for sum of Rs.32,40,000/ under sale deed dated 14.3.2008. It is the grievance of the appellant/plaintiff that the decree was passed in RCS No.587 of 2008 in favour of the appellant/plaintiff for declaration that he is entitled to purchase the suit property pursuant to agreement dated 27.2.2007. Thus, the defendants, agents, servants and the representatives etc. claiming under the original defendants were permanently restrained from selling, transferring or dispossessing of the suit property. It is under these circumstances that sale deed dated 14.3.2008 between respondent Nos.1 and 2 needs to be considered. Learned trial Judge referred to decree passed in RCS No.587 of 2008 in paragraph No.12 of the impugned order. However, it was observed that there was no injunction order against defendant Nos.1 and 2 restraining them to execute sale deed dated 14.3.2008. Learned trial Judge observed that order in RCS No.587 of 2008 was frustrated because sale deed is executed.