1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties, the appeal is heard forthwith.

2. The appeal is preferred by the original defendants challenging the order dated 21.04.2010 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court in Notice of Motion whereby the defendants are restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit flat.

3. The plaintiff-respondent no.1 contended that the defendant no.1. appellant is the owner of the suit flat. On 6th June, 2008 the defendant no.1 agreed to sell the suit flat to the plaintiff for consideration of Rs.40 lac. Out of the consideration amount, a sum of Rs.1 lac was paid by cheque on the said date and amount of Rs.15 lac was paid in cash on that day. Balance amount was to be paid on or before September 2008 before registration of the agreement. According to the plaintiff, subsequent to the contract with the plaintiff, defendant no.1 agreed to sell the property to defendant no.2. Therefore, the plaintiff filed suit the for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit flat without following due process of law. The plaintiff also took o