The court modified the interim injunction to require fair market valuations and banking transactions, addressing concerns of potential asset undervaluation and unauthorized cash dealings, ensuring fair protection for both parties during litigation.

JUDGMENT :

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J.

I.A. No. 9980/2024 (under Order XXXIX Rule 4 read with Section 151 CPC by D-1, 3 & 4 seeking modification of the interim injunction order dated 22.01.2024

1. The present application has been filed by defendant nos.1, 3 and 4 seeking modification of order dated 22.01.2024 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in FAO(OS) 90/2019, in view of the liberty granted by the Division Bench vide subsequent order dated 26.04.2024 to seek modification/variation of the aforesaid order dated 22.01.2024. The relevant excerpts from the order dated 26.04.2024 whereby liberty was granted by the Division Bench to the defendants/applicants reads as under:

“3. Present application has been filed on behalf of respondent nos.1, 3 and 4 (“applicants”) seeking modification of the consent order dated 22nd January, 2024 passed by this Court and seeking a direction to the appellant-plaintiff to maintain status quo with regard to the assets of the appellant company.

xxx xxx xxx

6. The relevant portion of the order dated 22nd January, 2024 reads as under:-

“1. Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the appellant-M/s Capital Land Builders Pvt. Ltd. can sell the land or property on the following terms:-

xxx xxx xxx (ii) No sale of land will be made below the circle rate and entire consideration towards sale of land will be received through ordinary banking channels in accordance with law i.e. Cheque or RTGS. Capital Land Builders Pvt. Ltd. will furnish details of the sale transaction before this Court. In the event it is discovered that cash transaction towards sale of land has taken place, the defendants i.e. Chowdhary Brahm Prakash fraction shall have the liberty to seek modification of the interim injunction order.”

(Emphasis supplied)

7. This Court is of the opinion that as the allegations in the present application are disputed, it would be appropriate if this Court were to have the benefit of an adjudication by a learned Single Judge before examining this aspect. Consequently, this Court directs the applicants to file an application seeking modification/variation of the interim injunction order passed by this Court before the learned Single Judge. Learned counsel for the applicant states that he would ensure that his application is listed before learned Single Judge within a week.

xxx xxx xxx

9. Consequently, the present application is disposed of with liberty to the applicants to file the application for modification/variation of this Court's order dated 22nd January, 2024. Needless to state that the rights and contentions of all the parties are left open and the matter would be decided by the learned Single Judge in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.”

2.0. The relevant facts giving rise to the present suit are as follows:

2.1. An ongoing dispute between two families over the shareholding and management of plaintiff no.1/M/s Capital Land Builders Pvt. Ltd. [hereafter the ‘Company’], as well as, control over the valuable assets of the Company, led to filing of the present suit by plaintiff nos. 2 to 4 [‘Kishor Lal Sachdeva’ faction] against defendant no.1/M/s Shaheed Memorial Society (Regd.) [hereafter the ‘Society’] and defendant nos. 2 to 8 [‘Chowdhary Brahm Prakash’ faction] inter alia for – (a) permanent injunction restraining the defendants from holding themselves out to be shareholders, directors, agents or authorised representatives of plaintiff no.1 Company and from dealing with the assets thereof; and (b) mandatory injunction directing the defendants to hand over to the plaintiffs all records in their power and possession.

2.2. Chowdhary Brahm Prakash is stated to have acquired 500 shares of the Com