Y. RUPESH RAJ Vs. MOHMOOD ALAM KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Order 43 Rule 1 of C.P.C. against the order, dtd. 20/7/2022, passed in I.A.No.359 of 2022 in O.S.No.70 of 2022 by the learned Principal District Judge, Vikarabad District, dismissing the petition filed by the appellant/plaintiff for grant of ad- interim injunction, restraining the respondent/defendant from alienating the petition scheduled land.

(2.) Necessary facts for disposal of this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal are as follows: The appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of agreement of sale dtd. 18/1/2022 in respect of scheduled land admeasuring Ac.11.08 guntas in Sy.Nos.92/A, 92/E and 92/EE situated at Yenkepally village, Pudur Mandal, Vikarabad District, by directing the respondent/defendant to execute a registered sale deed in respect of the suit scheduled property in favour of the plaintiff by receiving the balance sale consideration amount of Rs.80,00,000.00 and to hand over the vacant physical possession of the property and in case of failure the Court to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. Along with the suit, the plaintiff also filed I.A.No.359 of 2022 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C., seeking ad-interim injunction in his favour, restraining the respondent/defendant from alienating the petition scheduled property till the disposal of the main suit. It is stated in the affidavit that the respondent/defendant is the original owner and possessor of the petition scheduled land; that an agreement of sale dtd. 18/1/2022 was entered into between them for sale of the said land at the rate of Rs.25,00,000.00 per acre for a total sale consideration of Rs.2,80,00,000.00 in favour of the plaintiff; that the plaintiff has paid Rs.2,00,00,000.00 in cash to the defendant as advance on the date of agreement and that the defendant agreed to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff by receiving balance sale consideration of Rs.80,00,000.00. Even though the plaintiff is ready and willing to pay the balance sale consideration, the defendant did not come forward to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff.

(3.) The respondent/defendant filed counter denying material allegations made in the affidavit, inter alia, contending that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the petition scheduled land of Ac.11.08 guntas of Yenkepally village having purchased the same from M/s Jai Agriculture Farm represented by its proprietor Jaidev Baldev through a registered sale deed in the year 1998 and that out of the said land, Ac.2.00 guntas of land has been sold to one Banolla Shankar through a registered sale deed dtd. 22/10/2021. It is further contended that he is financially well settled and does not have any financial need in the family to sell his land to the plaintiff. It is further contended that the agreement of sale dtd. 18/1/2022 filed by the plaintiff is a fabricated one by forging the signature of the defendant and to that effect a private complaint has been filed and the same was referred to Chengomul Police Station for investigation. It is further contended that the defendant did not receive any consideration, more particularly Rs.2,00,00,000.00 cash from the plaintiff and the payment of such huge amount in net cash by the plaintiff is highly impossible and that, therefore, prayed to dismiss the petition. 3. During enquiry, no oral evidence was adduced by both parties, but Exs.P1 to P6 were marked on behalf of the appellant/petitioner/plaintiff and Exs.R1 to R4 were marked on behalf of the respondent/defendant.