JBS CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD Vs. DILLIP KUMAR NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Pattnaik, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner. He submits, his client, plaintiff in the suit, seeks interference with order dtd. 28/1/2022 of the first appellate Court, setting aside contested order of injunction passed by the trial Court. He draws attention to agreement of sale dtd. 16/12/2020 between opposite party defendant and his client. He demonstrates that opposite party had represented to obtain power from the co-sharers, to deal with the entire land at aggregate consideration of Rs.6,62,00,000.00. Rs.60,00,000.00 was paid by his client to opposite party, who thereafter sought to resile and not fulfill his obligations under the agreement. His client sued for permanent injunction restraining opposite party from alienating any part of the land being subject matter of the agreement. At the time of agreement, the land was under kisam 'chaka'.

(2.) He submits, the first appellate Court vacated the interim order on the ground that agricultural land cannot be fragmented and therefore injunction is not necessary. However, in the meantime the kisam, in respect of the agreement land, has been converted to 'gharabari'. This fact could not be brought to notice of the first appellate Court.

(3.) Mr. Rath, learned advocate appears on behalf of opposite party plaintiff. He submits, there is material suppression by petitioner in seeking interference with impugned order. It is a good order. Agricultural land cannot be fragmented and therefore there is no ground for interference.