The court emphasized the importance of corroborative evidence in establishing a prima facie case for specific performance of an oral agreement.

The plaintiff has filed the above suit for specific performance of an oral agreement stated to have been entered into by the plaintiff with defendant No.1 in the beginning of April, 2002 pursuant to which the defendant No.1 made two declarations on 29 August, 2002 and 21 March 2003 and for other ancillary reliefs.

2. The plaintiff has taken out the above Notice of Motion for appointment of Court Receiver and the usual injunctions for protecting the suit property.

3. The plaintiff is admittedly the licensor of the defendant No.1. The license is created in the name of defendant No.2, the Company of the plaintiff in which he is a director, The license is in respect of two flats in the building known as “Nepean House” at Malabar Hill, Mumbai showing Defendant No.1 as the owner.

4. It is the plaintiff’s case that consequent upon the license in his favour, defendant No.1 and the plaintiff negotiated for purchase of the licensed premises by the plaintiff. The negotiations culminated in an oral agreement under which the plaintiff was given option to purchase the suit property licensed to him for a sum of Rs.16 crores. The option was to be exercised during the period of the license between 1st December, 2003 and 30 November 2008. The consideration then payable by way of earnest was Rs.10 lakhs. The purchase would be under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (“Apartment Ownership Act”).

5. The plaintiff claims to have paid Rs.10.00 lakhs as earnest to defendant No.1 on 21 March, 2003 by cheque. The plaintiff accordingly claims to have exercised his option.

6. It is the case of the defendant No.1 that she executed what is stated to be her declarations under a misrepresentation that those declarations were under Section 2 of the Apartment Ownership Act. She has , therefore, refuted the option to purchase the licensed premises by the plaintiff. She claims that the declarations are bogus and no consideration is received by her. This is upon the premise that the declarations are inconsistent with each other and are blank in certain material particulars. She further claims that she has already executed a conveyance in respect of the suit premises in favour of the defendant Nos.3 and 4 who have been inducted in the licensed premises after possession of the licensed premises was obtained by her in a litigation filed by her from the plaintiff in the competent forum.

7. Defendant Nos.3 and 4 are in possession of the said flats. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 11 April, 2007 has been executed between defendant No.1 and defendant No.4 recital G of in which the factum of this litigation and the dispute between the plaintiff and defendant No.1 is expressly mentioned. The factum of the declaration dated 21 March 2003 got executed from her without being informed of the content, meaning and purport thereof is also mentioned. Clause 7.1.5 of the MoU shows the earnest of Rs..10.00 lakhs received by her by cheque No.128276 dated 21 March 2003 from the plaintiff sent to her by the then Advocates M/s.D.M. Harish and Co., and held by them in escrow, which was not encashed by her.

8. The plaintiff claims that this clause itself shows sufficient notice of the plaintiff’s claim upon defendant Nos.3 and 4 and consequently defendant Nos.3 and 4 are purchasers with notice of the plaintiff’s claim. The plaintiff has also registered notice of lis pendens on 3 May 2004, a fortnight after the filing of the suit and before the execution of the MoU on 11 April 2007 between defendant No.1 and defendant No.4.

9. For grant of the reliefs to the plaintiff, the prima facie case of the plaintiff which is required to be seen by the Court would be essentially upon reading the declarations themselves as also circumstantial evidence.

10. There are four declarations relied upon by the plaintiff. Two declarations are of defendant No.1 dated 29 August 2002 and 21st March 200