HANSRAJ JAIN Vs. SANTANU CHAUDHURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants claim by way of the present petition that this is a sun for land and since the property in question lies beyond the jurisdiction of this Court on its Original Side, the Court was incompetent to receive the action. The defendants seek revocation of the leave granted under clause 12 of the Letters Patent and for a direction that the plaint relating to the suit be taken off the file. There is an alternative prayer for dismissal of the suit.

(2.) Since the averments in the plaint are the only decisive material to be considered in a demurer application, the plaint has first to be seen. At paragraph 3 of the plaint it is stated that the defendants are absolute owners and in possession of about 45 cottah of land on Ballygunge Circular Road outside the jurisdiction. At the following paragraph the plaintiffs assert that an agreement for sale was entered into between the parties at a place within jurisdiction whereby the defendants were to sell about 20 cottah of the land at an agreed consideration. At paragraph 5 of the plaint, the plaintiffs claim to have made part payment of a sum of Rs.81.75 lakh against receipts issued by the defendants. At the next paragraph, the plaintiffs plead that a table discussion was held between the parties at a place within jurisdiction in March, 2004 where the terms of the agreement were acknowledged; such terms were subsequently reduced to writing in the agreement for sale. Paragraph 8 speaks of the agreement for sale having been executed within jurisdiction. Certain other part payments claimed to have been made are recorded in the ninth paragraph. The principal relief claimed is as follows:

(3.) The other reliefs sought are the usual ancillary ones for the appointment of a receiver, injunction, costs and further relief.