URMILA PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. T.P. Tripathy, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Md. A. Alam, learned counsel for the Opposite Party.

(2.) Present Petitioner, who is the Plaintiff, has filed CS No.7749 of 2014 before learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) (LR & LTV), Bhubaneswar praying for specific performance of contract and permanent injunction against the Defendant. Further, he filed an application under Order 39, Rule 1 & 2 of the C.P.C. praying for temporary injunction against the Defendant not to evict him from the suit shop room. The same being rejected by the trial court, the Plaintiff preferred first appeal which was also rejected. Against both the orders of the trial court dtd. 2/5/2024 and the 1st Appellate Court dtd. 7/2/2025, the Plaintiff has come up in the present CMP.

(3.) The suit property is a shop house and according to the Plaintiff he is inducted in possession thereof as a tenant in the year 2000 and continuing as such till date. As per claim of the Plaintiff, he paid Rs.5.00 lakhs to the Defendant for sale of said shop room by way of an oral agreement. However, the Defendant retracted from the commitment later on and so, the Plaintiff was compelled to file the suit for specific performance of the contract.