Vinod Kumar vs Charan Dass Sharma And Others on 19 May, 2014

[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Vinod Kumar vs Charan Dass Sharma And Others on 19 May, 2014

Bench: Jaswant Singh

CR 2617/2014                           1                                             110

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                                               Date of decision:19/05/2014.

Vinod Kumar
                                              .............Petitioner
                          v.

Charan Dass Sharma and others
                                              .............Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

Present:-    Ms.Satpreet Grewal,Advocate for the petitioner

Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral)

Plaintiff is in revision aggrieved against the concurrent orders passed by both the Courts below whereby his application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC for temporary injunction was dismissed vide order dated 6.5.2013 (P-8) passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Garhshankar and the findings affirmed vide order dated 10./3.2014 (P-9) passed by the learned Additional District Judge(Adhoc)FTC,Hoshiarpur.

Plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction seeking to restrain the defendants from alienating any part of the suit land measuring 34K2M as also from dispossessing the plaintiff illegally and forcibly from the suit land, fully described in the plaint on the pleadings that the defendants had entered into an Agreement to Sell dated 22.11.2011 for the sale of suit land for a total sale consideration of Rs.98 lacs on payment of an earnest money of Rs.10 lacs and was also put in possession of the part of the suit land at the time of the Joshi Rajinder Prashad 2014.05.19 14:09 I attest to the accuracy of this Order.

High Court, Chandigarh.

CR 2617/2014 2 110

execution of the said Agreement to Sell. It is stated that the target date for execution of the sale deed was 31.7.2013. Defendants have admitted execution of the Agreement to Sell as also the payment of Rs.10 lacs as earnest money. However, they have stated that the plaintiff, as per the Agreement to Sell was required to pay the next installment towards earnest money for a sum of Rs.30 lacs by 31.12.2012. The said installment was not paid and instead the suit was filed on 25.1.2013.

Both the Courts below have held that the plaintiff has not approached the Court with clean hands regarding suppression of payment of next installment of earnest money on 31.12.2012 as also finding no prima facie case in favour of the plaintiff. Even otherwise no document has been placed on record to show that part possession of the suit land was delivered to the plaintiff.

At the time of hearing learned counsel for the plaintiff/petitioner could not point out any perversity or material illegality in the impugned orders warranting interference by this Court.

Dismissed.




19.05.2014                                           (Jaswant Singh)
joshi                                                    Judge




                                                               Joshi Rajinder Prashad
                                                               2014.05.19 14:09
                                                               I attest to the accuracy of this
                                                               Order.
                                                               High Court, Chandigarh.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court