An agreement to sell does not confer any legal right until formally executed; merely having such an agreement without a registered sale deed leaves no interest to sue third parties.

JUDGMENT :

NIRAL R. MEHTA, J.

1. This Appeal, at the instance of the original plaintiffs, is directed against the order dated 17^th January, 2025 passed in Special Civil Suit No.675 of 2017 passed below Exh.17 by learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Sanand, Ahmedabad (Rural), whereby the learned Judge has rejected the plaint under the provisions of the Order VII Rule 11(a) and 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. Basic facts of the case can be stated as under:

2.1 Land bearing Survey No.314 admeasuring 5868 sq. mtrs. and Survey No.316 admeasuring 6576 sq. mtrs. situated in Village Godhavi, Taluka Sanand, District Ahmedabad, was originally owned by original Defendant No.1. Defendant No.1 has executed power of attorney in favour of Defendant No.2 with respect to the aforesaid lands. Pursuant to the said power of attorney, Defendant No.2-power of attorney holder, executed a registered agreement to sell dated 28^th October, 1996 bearing No.2306 with possession in favour of one Shri Swapnilbhai Arvindbhai Doshi, now deceased, happened to be the husband of original plaintiff No.1 and father of original plaintiff Nos.2 and 3.

2.2 Said Swapnilbhai Doshi expired on 21^st November, 2003. During life span of Swapnilbhai Doshi, the said agreement to sell was not culminated into the sale deed. Pertinent to note that the registered agreement to sell dated 28^th October, 1996 appears to be cancelled on 20^th February, 2004.

2.3 Defendant No.1 thereafter appears to have sold out the aforesaid lands in favour of original Defendant Nos.3 to 5 by way of registered sale deed Nos.323 and 324 dated 19^th February, 2004. The said transaction got mutated in the revenue record by way of Mutation Entry Nos.4412 and 4417 dated 27^th February, 2004 and later on certified on 07^th April, 2004.

2.4 The plaintiffs appear to have filed one Special Civil Suit No.80 of 2005 against the present Defendant Nos.1 to 5 seeking, inter alia, specific performance of agreement to sell dated 28^th October, 1996 and challenge to the sale deed dated 19^th February, 2003 (sic. 19^th February, 2004) executed in favour of Defendant Nos.3 to 5 and also sought perpetual injunction.

2.5 During the pendency of the said Special Civil Suit No.80 of 2005, Defendant Nos.3 to 5 have further sold out the suit property in favour of Defendant No.6 by way of registered sale deed Nos.5842 to 5844 dated 01^st December, 2007. Defendant No.6 then sold out the suit property in favour of Defendant No.7 by executing registered sale deed No.530 dated 21^st January, 2010.

2.6 In view of the aforesaid subsequent development during the pendency of the suit, the plaintiffs have moved an application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) for joining Defendant Nos.6 and 7 in Special Civil Suit No.80 of 2005. The said application, however, was rejected by the learned trial court vide order dated 16^th November, 2013.

2.7 It appears that thereafter the said Special Civil Suit No.80 of 2005 ordered to be dismissed for default on 01^st December, 2014.

2.8 It further appears that the plaintiffs have filed Civil Miscellaneous Application No.45 of 2017 in the court of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur for restoration of Special Civil Suit No.80 of 2005. The said application was ordered to be returned under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code vide order dated 03^rd August, 2019 by learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) on the ground of having no jurisdiction. After the aforesaid order, learned advocate for the appellants has not shown and/or produced any application for restoration of Special Civil Suit No.80 of 2005 filed in the appropriate court.

2.9 In the meantime, however, present suit for cancellation of sale deed of Defendant Nos.6 and 7 filed on 02^nd May, 2017. For the brevity, reliefs prayed for in the said suit are reproduced hereunder:

“(a) In consideration of the facts and circumstances of the plaint, the Defend