ENTREPRENEURS (CALCUTTA) PVT LTD Vs. KANWAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein filed a suit for the possession, by way of specific performance, of the land in suit. The party opposite before the learned Trial Court is arrayed herein as a respondent. It is apparent from the impugned order itself that the matter was listed for that date for recording of evidence of the plaintiff-petitioner. There was a request for adjournment for the purpose aforementioned. The matter came to be adjourned to 29.05.2010 for adducing of evidence on the own responsibility of the plaintiff-petitioner. While adjourning the case for the purpose aforementioned, the learned Trial Court also observed that arguments on stay application shall also be heard on that date. Apart from granting adjournment on the lines indicated above, the learned Trial Judge granted the following order as well:

(2.) Since the plaintiff has pleaded its willingness and readiness to perform its part of contract, plaintiff is directed to deposit the balance sale consideration in the court in shape of FDR in the name of court within 30 days from today. However, the deposit shall be without prejudice to the rights of the parties. Further, on the request of learned Counsel for plaintiff it is clarified that the FD in question shall be made in the name of the court i.e. Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.)-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon at State Bank of Patiala, Branch Mini Secretariat, Gurgaon for three years. The Branch Manager shall comply with the order on production of certified copy of the order.

(3.) The plaintiff-petitioner calls into question the validity of that order on an averment that there was neither any occasion nor any justification on the part of the learned Trial Court in directing the plaintiff-petitioner to deposit the balance sale consideration, in the form of an FDR, in the name of the Court.