B.GOEL
RAJESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
MANOJ JAIN – Respondent
( 1 ) BY this order I shall dispose of IA No. 7076/96 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 and IA No. 4916/97 under Section 151 Civil Procedure Code Filed by the plaintiff. The first application is for ad interim injunction and the second for release of his two FDRs deposited by the plaintiff in pursuance of the interim order.
( 2 ) THE plaintiff has filed this suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 3. 3. 1996 which defendant had entered into with him for sale of his house No. 107, Block-A, Lok Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi for a sum of Rs. 37,89,000. 00 , a sum of Rs. one lakh was paid on that day; the balance amount was payable by 3. 6. 96 at the time of execution and registration of relevant documents of sale by the defendant. Another cheque of Rs. 3 lakhs was also sent on 7. 3. 96 but defendant did not encash it; the plaintiff had called upon the defendant by legal notice dated 24. 4. 96 to complete the sale, after obtaining requisite clearance from income-tax authorities. No reply to it was sent; but vide letter dated 3. 6. 1996 the defendant informed him that he had committed breach and the amount of earnest money was forfeited. The plaintiff has alleged
Gomathinayagam Pillai v. Pallaniswami Nadar
Dorab Cawasji Warden v. Coomi Sorab Warden
Gomathinayagam Pillai v. Pallaniswami Nadar
ArdashirM. Mama v. Flora Sasson
Bank of India Ltd. v. Jameshetji A.H. Chinoy
Ansal Properties and Industries (P) Ltd. v. Rajender Singh
M.L. Devender Singh v. Syed Khaja
REFERRED TO : Radhe Krishan Aggarwal v. Chandrawati
Aggarwal Hotels (P) Ltd. v. Focus Properties (P) Ltd.
Trailakyanath Maity v. Provabati Santra
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.