IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed that a party fulfilling contractual obligations is entitled to protection against actions that undermine their rights, particularly under the Transfer of Property Act.

JUDGMENT :

(Krishna Rao, J.) :

1. The plaintiff has filed the present application being G.A. No. 2 of 2023 in C.S. No. 162 of 2022 praying for an order of injunction. The Principal Director of the plaintiff company, namely, Dr. Saumabha Dasgupta and the defendant no.1 being the close friends decided to set up a diagnostic center in the suit property belonging to the defendant no.1 and accordingly on 1st March, 2007, the defendant no.1 had entered into a Tenancy Agreement with the plaintiff with respect to the suit property upon payment of monthly rent.

2. The defendant no.1 obtained a Cash Credit Loan of Rs.44,00,000/-from the State Bank of India, Bhupen Bose Avenue Branch by keeping the suit property as collateral security to the bank and when the defendant no.1 was not in a position to repay the loan, the defendant no. 1 was in search of a purchaser who can purchase the property and out of the said consideration money, the defendant no.1 can liquidate the loan amount.

3. When the plaintiff came to know about the same, the plaintiff approached the defendant no.1 to purchase the suit property for a total consideration amount of Rs.1,10,00,000/-subject to the terms and conditions that a sum of Rs.44,00,000/-will be paid by the plaintiff to liquidate the dues of the defendant no.1 directly to the defendant no.2 to liquidate the loan amount.

4. An Agreement for Sale was executed between the plaintiff and the defendant no.1, on 26th April, 2008 and the plaintiff has paid an advance amount of Rs.22,00,000/-to the defendant no.1. As per the agreement entered between the plaintiff and the defendant no.1, the defendant no.1 agreed to execute the Conveyance Deed in favour of the plaintiff within 90 days from the date of the execution of the agreement. The defendant no.1 failed to execute the deed, a Supplementary Agreement for Sale dated 30th July, 2008, was entered between the parties by extending the time for completion of Deed of Conveyance by one month keeping the other terms and conditions as it is.

5. On 30th August, 2008, the defendant no.1 had approached the plaintiff requesting for some more time to complete the Deed of Conveyance and as per the request of the defendant no.1, a second Supplementary Agreement for Sale was executed on 30th August, 2008 by extending further one month time i.e. upto 30th September, 2008 for execution of Conveyance Deed. At the time of execution of second Supplementary Agreement for Sale, the defendant no.1 has handed over the possession of the suit property by executing a possession letter.

6. The defendant no.1 has also provided no objection to the plaintiff for transfer of consumer name from the defendant no.1 to the plaintiff. The plaintiff by depositing an amount of Rs.44,00,000/-with the defendant no.2 closed the Cash Credit Loan of the defendant no.1 and requested the defendant no.1 to execute Deed of Conveyance in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff came to know that the defendant no.1 had raised a further loan by keeping the suit property as collateral security.

7. Even after the Cash Credit Loan was liquidated by the plaintiff, the defendant no.1 had obtained another loan by keeping the suit property as collateral security and failed to execute Deed of Conveyance, the plaintiff had filed a suit before the Learned City Civil Court being T.S. No. 223 of 2012 for declaration and permanent injunction against the 9th defendants and also obtained an ex-parte ad-interim order on February, 2012. Subsequently, the suit was amended as a Suit for Specific Performance of Contract. In the said suit, the defendant no.1 has filed an application under Order VII, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and the plaintiff had filed another application under Order VII, Rule 10A(2) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for taking back the plaint. After taking the suit back, the plaintiff has filed the present suit for Specific Performance of Contract, declaration and permanent inj