JASMER SINGH Vs. KANWALJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order disposes of Civil Revisions Nos. 1453 of 1990 and 1509 of 1990. These are directed against the order of the Appellate Court reversing on appeal that of the trial Judge whereby the Latter declined to grant interim injunction to the vendees against the vendors restraining them from alienating the disputed property in any manner.

(2.) I have alluded to the facts arising from the pleadings of the parties in Civil Suit Kanwaljit Singh v. Jang Singh etc. giving rise to Civil Revision No. 1453 of 1989.

(3.) THE facts :-An agreement to sell dated July 18, 1989 was executed by Jang Singh son of Partap Singh, Manohar Singh, Balbir Singh sons of Jang Singh and Surjit Singh son of Jang Singh, residents of Barewala Awan, Tehsil and District Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as the vendors) in favour of Lav Kumar son of Sh. Pawan Kumar son of Shri Dina Nath and Kamaljit Singh son of Ranbir Singh son of S. Teja Singh, residents of 802, Gurdev Nagar, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as the vendees) agreeing to sell land measuring 30 bighas 3 biswas 5 biswansis Pukhta situate at Mauza Barewal Awan, Tehsil and District Ludhiana at the rate of Rs. 4,05,000/- per acre. The essential terms incorporated in the agreement were; one lac of rupees were given as Sai (part earnest money) on the date of execution of the agreement to sell. Another sum of Rs. 9 lacs was to be paid as additional sum by way of earnest money on November 30, 1989. The balance amount was to be paid in instalments and the first instalment of Rs. 15 lacs was to be paid on May 31, 1990. The remaining amount was to be paid in three equal half yearly instalments. The possession was to be delivered on payment of the remaining part of the earnest money viz. Rs. 9 lacs, on November 30, 1989. After payment of the earnest money, the vendees were entitled to enter into possession and divide the land into plots. The vendors were to get the Nishan Dehi done by November 30, 1989. The document also recites that the vendors were in possession and the vendees will be entitled to enter into possession on payment of the entire earnest money i. e. Rs. 10 lacs. It appears that part of the earnest money viz. Rs. 9 lacs which was to be paid on November 30,1989 was not paid by the vendees. Apprehending that the vendors may not sell the property to any other persons, the vendees filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the vendors from alienating the property in any manner. Along with the suit, an application under O. 39, Rr. 1, 2 C. P. C. was also filed which was rejected by the trial Judge, but on appeal, the order was reversed by the first Appellate Court and the same has been challenged in this revision petition.