Final Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 22 CS SCJ 782/24
M/s Maharani Gems Pvt Ltd Vs. Sukhwinder Kaur
-1/2-
25.07.2024
Present: Ms. Pooja Kohli, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff.
Briefly stated, plaintiff and defendant entered into an
agreement to sell qua property bearing no. Flat No. 23, First Floor, Block
D-1, Model Town Area, Village Malkapur, Chhalni, Delhi-09 for a
consideration amount of Rs 3.2 crore. It is submitted by the plaintiff that an
amount of Rs 1,04,64,200/- has already been paid to the defendant and the
plaintiff is ready and willing to pay the balance consideration amount on
execution of sale deed. It is alleged by the plaintiff that an apprehension
exists that the defendant may create third party interest in the suit property.
Accordingly, it is prayed that permanent injunction be granted restraining
the defendant from creating third party interest in the suit property and
mandatory injunction be granted thereby directing the defendant to execute
the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff.
Arguments have already been heard and record has been
perused.
The plaintiff has relied upon the judgment titled ‘Sucha Singh
Sodhi (D) through LRs Vs. Baldev Raj Walia’ cited in AIR 2018 SC 2241.
The same has been perused. The said judgment has wrongly been relied
upon since the facts and the law discussed in the said judgment are
different from the issue in the present matter.
In the present matter, the plaintiff does not have any right over
the suit property. The only right vested with the plaintiff qua the suit
property is to enforce the agreement to sell by filing the suit for specific
performance.
-- 1 of 2 --
22 CS SCJ 782/24
M/s Maharani Gems Pvt Ltd Vs. Sukhwinder Kaur
-2/2-
It is observed that the plaintiff in garb of mandatory injunction
is seeking specific performance of the agreement to sell. The valuation of
the suit and the court fees annexed thereto are different for the suit seeking
reliefs of injunction and the relief seeking specific performance of the
agreement. Section 41 (h) of Specific Relief Act clearly states that an
injunction shall not be granted where an equal and efficacious remedy is
available.
In view of the above discussion, the present suit is hereby
rejected u/o VII rule 11 (d) CPC.
Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(Manish Jain)
ACJ-CCJ-ARC-North
Rohini Court-25.07.2024
-- 2 of 2 --