TRILOK CHAND Vs. KANTA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This misc. appeal has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved with the order dated 16.11.2015 passed by Additional District Judge No.2, Bikaner (for short 'the trial court' hereinafter), whereby the application filed by the appellant under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with section 151 CPC has been dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the appellant filed a suit for specific performance of contract before the trial court while alleging that deceased Gavara Devi wife of Poonam Chand was the owner of agricultural land situated in Khasra No.483 measuing 45 Bighas and

(3.) Biswas in village Mahajan. During her life time, as she was in need of money for her family requirements, she had sold the above mentioned agricultural land to the appellant for a consideration of Rs.72,250/ - and for that, she had executed an agreement on 08.09.1993. It is also stated that the consideration amount was paid in cash and the possession of the above land was also handed over to the appellant. It is claimed that Gavara Devi died on 16.12.1996 and thereafter her husband Poonam Chand also agreed to execute the agreement to sell the land, however, on 21.05.2008, some unknown persons along with brokers visited the said agricultural land and informed the appellant that they are negotiating with the original Khatedars to purchase the above mentioned agricultural land. When the appellant contacted the respondents and asked them to get the sale deed executed as also the agreement dated 08.09.1993, they refused and threatened him to dispossess him from the land. The appellant prayed for issuing decree of specific performance of contract directing the respondents to execute the sale deed of the above mentioned land in his favour. Along with the suit for specific performance of contract, an application for granting temporary injunction has also been filed by the appellant, however, the trial court, after hearing the counsel for the parties, has rejected the application vide impugned order. Hence, this appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the trial court has grossly erred in observing that prima facie case does not exist in favour of the appellant though the appellant had filed the suit on the basis of agreement executed by Gavara Devi in his favour and he is in possession of the land since the execution of the said agreement i.e. from 08.09.1993. It is further argued that the trial court has dismissed the application filed by the appellant for granting temporary injunction solely on the ground that the appellant has filed the suit for specific performance of contract in the year 2008 i.e. after 14 years of the execution of the agreement dated 08.09.1993. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that even if there is any inordinate delay in filing the suit for specific performance of contract, the trial court should have at least restrained the defendants from further alienating that property. In support of the above contentions, learned counsel for the appellants has placed reliance on decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ravi Prakash Agarwal & Ors. vs. Rajesh Prasad Agarwal & Ors., 2008 AIR SCW 7407 and Eshwarappa & anr. vs. Vishalakshamma & Ors., 2009(1) CT(SC) 29. The learned counsel for the appellant has also placed reliance on decisions of this Court in Peer Gulam Naseer vs. Peer Gulam Jelanee, RLR 1988(2) 871 and Smt. Lad Kanwar vs. Shri Ladu & Ors., 2015 WLC (Raj.) UC 740.