NOORJAHAN SAYED Vs. RAMA GAURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Plaintiffs in the above Suit obtained an Ex- parte decree on 14 th October, 2003 for specific performance of their agreement dated 2nd February, 1995 with the Defendant s. The Plaintiffs sought to execute the decree by issue of a warrant of possession. During the course of taking possession the Respondent obstructed the execution of the decree. Hence, this Chamber Summons has been taken out under Order XXI Rule 97 of the C.P.C.

(2.) It is the case of the Respondent that one Mr. & Mrs. Desai sold the suit premises to Uday Shetty on 16th September, 1996. Uday Shetty sold the property to Chandrakant Khanolkar 27 th December, 1999. Chandrakant Khanolkar sold the property to the Respondent /Obs t r uctionist on 7th August, 2003. The Respondent has shown that he has paid the consideration, hence, he is put in possession on 6th August, 2003.

(3.) The very first transfer by the Defendant is after the filing of the suit and much after the transaction of the Defendant with the Plaintiff. The Defendant had already entered into an agreement with the Plaintiffs on 2nd February, 1995. This suit came to be filed for specific performance of that agreement on 4th July, 1996. The Defendant transferred the suit property to one Rama Gauri W/o, Ramniklal Parikh who in turn transferred the suit property to one Mr. & Mrs. Desai on 30 th April, 1996, three months before filing of the suit. Thereafter, these parties have entered into similar further transfers.