The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the entitlement for interim stay under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the context of specific performance of an agreement to sell.

JUDGMENT

Vivek Singh Thakur, J. - This application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'CPC') seeking interim stay against the non-applicant/defendant has been preferred by the applicants-plaintiffs alongwith main suit for Specific Performance of agreement to sell dated 15.06.2013 attested on 22.06.2013 executed between applicants-plaintiffs (vendees) and non-applicant/defendant (vendor), for selling the suit land by non-applicant/defendant to applicants-plaintiffs for consideration of Rs.1,30,00,000/-. As per agreement, Rs.15,00,000/- had been received by the non-applicant/defendant at the time of execution of agreement and balance amount of consideration was to be paid at the time of execution of sale deed for which last date was fixed as 15.07.2018.

2. It is case of the applicants-plaintiffs that apart from Rs.15,00,000/- as earnest money, non-applicant/defendant has also received a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- on 20.06.2013, Rs.5,00,000/- on 30.09.2013 as a part of the sale consideration, and nonapplicant/defendant, in total, has received a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- from the applicants-plaintiffs with assurance that sale deed would be executed well before the appointed date i.e. 15.07.2018.

3. It is case of the applicants-plaintiffs that before expiry of appointed date i.e. 15.07.2018, applicants-plaintiffs had requested the non-applicant/defendant orally as well as through registered letter with acknowledgement for executing the sale deed, but non-applicant/defendant has expressed his inability to execute and register the sale deed before 15.07.2018 and lastly had refused to receive the letter/notice dated 10.07.2018 issued to him (non-applicant/defendant) to execute the sale deed. In addition, applicant-plaintiff No.1 had talked with nonapplicant/defendant telephonically for execution of sale deed and non-applicant/defendant had finally agreed to execute and register the sale deed on 16.07.2018 as 15.07.2018 was Sunday. Accordingly, as per applicants-plaintiffs, applicant-plaintiff No.1 alongwith balance sale consideration visited the office of SubRegistrar (Rural) at Shimla and remained in the Complex of SubRegistrar from 10.30 a.m. to 4.45 p.m. on 16.07.2018 and she had also sworn in affidavit to this effect which was duly attested by the Executive Magistrate, Shimla (Rural), who was also exercising powers of Sub-Registrar. But on that day, nonapplicant/defendant did not turn up. Thereafter, on 17.07.2018, applicant-plaintiff No.1 personally met non-applicant/defendant to execute the sale deed, but non-applicant/defendant flatly refused and ask for money as the value of the property, according to non-applicant/defendant, had increased manifold since execution of agreement in the year 2013. Thereafter, applicants-plaintiffs had again requested non-applicant/ defendant personally as well as telephonically on 18.07.2018 to execute and register the sale deed, but non-applicant/defendant despite having received a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- from the applicants-plaintiffs avoided execution and registration of sale deed on one pretext or the other and had threatened to transfer the property to third party for escalation of price of the property.

4. It is claim of the applicants-plaintiffs that they are ready and willing to perform their part of contract, but nonapplicant/defendant is not willing to perform his part and on account of omission and commission on the part of nonapplicant/defendant, causing delay to execute and register the sale deed, applicants-plaintiffs have suffered loss.

5. It is also submitted on behalf of the applicantsplaintiffs that with ulterior motive and malafide intention, to defeat lawful right of the applicants-plaintiffs, nonapplicant/defendant has threatened to sell property to third party at higher price and to create complication to the applicantsplaintiffs, he is mounting pressure on them to give effect to his nefarious and ill designs to extort extra amount fro