RUPANTAR CONSTRUCTION Vs. SETT & DEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 30th November, 2006 passed by the Assistant District Judge, Second Court at Barasat in Title Suit No.49 of 2005.

(2.) The case of the appellant/plaintiff is that the plaintiff entered into an agreement with the defendant for purchase of the suit property wherein the defendant agreed to transfer and/or sell the suit property in favour of the plaintiff for a valuable consideration and the defendant also agreed to execute necessary documents in favour of the plaintiff. But in spite of payment of a considerable sum of Rs. 25,000/-, the defendant was trying to transfer the suit property in favour of some other persons so as to defeat the rightful claim of the plaintiff/appellant. For that reason, it is stated, the plaintiff/appellant was compelled to file the instant suit and the injunction application as well.

(3.) After hearing the learned Advocate for the plaintiff and after perusing the documents relied upon, the trial Court held that the document on which the plaintiff banked his claim, was not a concluded contract and, therefore, the plaintiff/appellant was not entitled to get any decree of specific performance. It was further held that the plaintiff could not make out any prima facie case nor any balance of convenience and inconvenience in his favour and, accordingly, refused to grant any order of injunction.