MOHAN SINGH Vs. BIKRAMJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF - petitioner has preferred this revision petition against the order passed by the trial Court dated October 5, 2012 and affirmed by the lower Appellate Court dated January 5, 2015, dismissing the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC restraining the defendant - respondents from alienating the property in dispute during the pendency of the suit.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the case of the plaintiff - petitioner as per his pleadings is that he had entered into an oral agreement of sale with defendant -respondent No.1, a minor, to sell 4 kanal 12 marla of land for sale consideration of Rs.8.50 lacs and received a sum of Rs.1 lac as earnest money and had agreed to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the defendant - respondent No.1. He claims that on January 24, 2008, the defendant - respondent No.2 asked the plaintiff - petitioner to get the sale deed registered on January 25, 2008, having been prepared by him. The sale deed was executed for 7 kanals 2 marla of land mentioned in the heading of the plaint. The claim of the plaintiff - petitioner is that a fraud has been played upon him and that his share in the property in dispute is only to the extent of 4 kanals 12 marlas as such the sale deed of 7 kanals 2 marlas of the khasra numbers mentioned in the plaint, is illegal.

(3.) THE claim of the defendant - respondents in the written statement is that the suit has not been valued properly and the same is liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The defendant - respondent No.1 has claimed to be owner in possession of the suit property as per the sale deed dated January 25, 2008 executed and registered in his favour in the office of Sub Registrar.