KUNDAN SINGH Vs. PUSTIMARGIYA TRITYA PEETH PRANAYAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THIS appeal is against the order of the trial court dated 28. 3. 2006 passed on an application filed by the plaintiff/appellant under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC. The trial court dismissed the injunction application filed by the appellant in a case where the appellant filed the suit for specific performance of oral agreement dated 26. 6. 2005.

(3.) THE respondents no. 7 to 10 denied all the allegations made in the plaint by the plaintiff. THEy denied the agreement between the plaintiff and the respondents no. 1 to 6. For tape conservation, it is submitted that the tape cannot be admitted in evidence. THEy justified their contract and the consent letter dated 15. 9. 2005 which was registered in their favour on 16. 9. 2005. THEy pleaded that they are bonafide transferee for valuable consideration without notice of any prior agreement and, therefore also, the appellant is not entitled to any relief. It is also submitted that in addition to consideration of Rs. 35,000/- per hectare for surface rent, the respondents no. 7 to 10 agreed to give Rs. 60 lakhs by cheque which is not refundable amount and income out of interest from said Rs. 60 lakhs will be Rs. 7,20,000/- per year and thereby, the respondent no. 1 trust will get Rs. 11,05,000/- per year.