EASTERN INDIA HOME MAKERS Vs. SURENDRA KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pronounced On 5/8/2024 Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned counsel for the espondents.

(2.) The present first appeal is directed against the judgment dtd. 28/2/2020 (decree signed on 7/3/2020) passed in Original (Title) Suit No. 85 of 2009, whereby and whereunder, the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-1st, Jamshedpur partly allowed the suit of the plaintiff by allowing the suit for Specific Performance of Contract dtd. 29/11/2004 directing the defendants (appellants) to deliver 12 flats as mentioned in Schedule-B to the plaint to the plaintiff within four months, a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from disposing off or in any way to alienate or transfer the schedule-B flats or any portion thereof to any person along with a decree declaring that the registered Sale Deed No. 2084 and 2085 both dtd. 29/4/2006 executed by defendant no. 2 as an attorney of the plaintiffs in favour of defendant no. 1 represented by Rajendra Prasad Pathak is illegal, void and inoperative and at the same time declining the relief sought by the plaintiffs for recovery of Rs.17.00 lakhs from the defendants.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case is that the plaintiffs have acquired suit Schedule-A land through valid registered sale deed no. 2486 dtd. 6/4/1984, Area - 5 Katha of land in favour of plaintiff no. 2 and vide registered sale deed no. 7760 dtd. 15/12/1990, Area - 5 Katha of land in favour of plaintiff no. 1, vide registered sale deed no. 198 dtd. 17/1/1994, Area - 2 Katha of land in favour of plaintiff no. 2 and deed no. 199 dtd. 17/1/1994, Area - 3 Katha of land in favour of plaintiff no. 1, as such, plaintiffs came into peaceful possession of the aforesaid total 15 Kathas of land and being husband and wife jointly owned the suit property as described in Schedule-A to the plaint.