1. By order dated 16.09.2017, while the learned counsels for the petitioners and the respondent No.1/ caveator were heard on length on the prayer for interim relief, which was strongly opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent No.1, this court had reserved its orders and for the time being dispensed with the issuance of notice to the remaining respondents No.2 to 5.

2. At the outset, it must be narrated that when the matter was listed in the motion column, by order dated 14.09.2017, as documents on which the petitioners had relied were not on record, an opportunity was granted to the learned counsels for the petitioners to file any documents forming part of the record. Accordingly, in the form of additional affidavit filed on 15.09.2017, some documents have been brought on record by the petitioners. When the matter was last listed on 16.09.2017, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 prayed for and was allowed to produce some more documents, some of which according to him were not produced.

3. The Respondent No.1 i.e. Ghosh Brothers Car Pvt. Ltd., had filed a suit, which was numbered as T.S. No. 347/2016, and is pending for disposal before the Court of the learned Civil Judge No.1, Kamrup (Metropolitan), Guwahati. The suit is for declaration, specific performance of agreement, for permanent injunction and alternatively for recovery of money. The original defendants in the said suit are – (1) Smt. Anjana Brahma (Respondent No.2), (2) Smt. Archana Dewriary (Respondent No.3), (3) Sri Dipankar Brahma (Respondent No.4), (4) Smt. Kalpana Brahma (Respondent No.5), (5) Smt. Sweta Jalan (Respondent No.6). In course of proceedings, the following defendants were impleaded by orders dated 10.03.2017 and 11.05.2017 - (6) Urban World Motors Pvt. Ltd. (petitioner No.1), (7) Musstt. Rumena Rahman (Petitioner No.2), (8) Mr. Atikur Rahman (Petitioner No.3), (9) Musstt. Sabina Pariat (Petitioner No.4).

4. The relevant sequence of events are as follows:-

a. 03.03.2011 – Agreement for Lease bearing Registered Deed No. 3777 dated 03.03.2011 executed by the respondents No.2 to 4 as lessors with Respondent No.1. By the said agreement, the Respondent No.1/ Lessee had paid to the respondents No.2 to 4 a sum of Rs.22,29,000/- and agreed to lease out the plot of land described in Schedule-A thereto. The lessors i.e. respondents No.2 to 5 had undertaken to construct a Shed/ Assam Type house thereon with built-up area of about 20,000 square feet as per the layout of the lessee/respondent No.1 and the construction was to come up at the cost of the lessee/respondent No.1. The cost of construction was recoverable by the lessee by deducting a fixed amount as agreed there under. The estimated cost of construction was estimated at Rs.1,60,00,000/-. Monthly rent was payable from within 7 days from the date of handing over possession to the lessee/respondent No.1. The agreement contained various terms and conditions including the provisions for enhancement of monthly rent from time to time.

b. As per the plaint of TS 347/16, the proposed construction was on verge of completion and as possession of the suit premises was not handed over to the lessee/respondent No.1, it was claimed that the occasion to pay monthly rent never arose. The respondent No.1 claimed to have paid a sum of Rs.1,53,73,925/- to the contractors of the lessors/respondents No.2 to 5 and had incurred an expenditure to the tune of more than Rs.1,83,57,925/-.

c. The respondent No.1 received an advocate’s notice on 15.06.2016, claiming therein that as monthly rent since execution of agreement was never paid, they were taking steps to institute proceedings for eviction and for recovery of arrear rent. The respondent No.1 projected that they came to know on 19.08.2016 that the respondents No.2 to 5 were taking steps for alienating the suit property and on 20.08.2016, one of the Directors of the respondent No.1 enquired with the respondents No.2 to 5 with the request for handi