1. The above Civil Revision Petitions are filed against the Orders dated 21.09.2007 and 211. 2007 passed in I.A. Nos.11433 of 2007 and 5773 of 2007 in O.S. No.1959 of 2007 on the file of the VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

2. The defendant in O.S. No.1959 of 2007 is the revision petitioner in both the revision Petitions. As parties and the dispute involved in both the Civil Revision Petitions are one and the same, a common order is being passed, to dispose of the revision Petitions.

3. O.S. No.1959 of 2007 has been filed by the respondent/plaintiff, for :

.(a) directing the revision petitioner/defendant for specific performance of the agreement dated 15.02.2006;

.(b) Permanent injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the Suit premises covered in the agreement dated 15.02.2006 to any third parties; and

.(c) for other reliefs and cost.

4. The case of the respondent/plaintiff in O.S. No.1959 of 2007 is that, he was a lawful tenant of one Mr. K.L.R. Niranjan in respect of shop measuring 650 sq.ft. at south-west direction under the name and style of Sri Jeet Enterpirses, at door No.124, Audiappan Naicken street, Chennai 79 for the past 19 years. The above said Niranjan sold the suit shop and the abutting building to the revision petitioner/ defendant. The previous landlord also duly informed the respondent/ plaintiff about the selling of the above said shop to the revision petitioner/defendant. The revision petitioner/defendant also sent a letter to the respondent/plaintiff on 30.1.2006 recognising the respondent/plaintiff as her tenant. The revision petitioner/defendant expressed her intention of demolishing and reconstructing the existing building and in the new portion, the respondent/plaintiff was offered a shop measuring 650 sq.ft. on a monthly rent of Rs.4,500/-. Hence, the revision petitioner/defendant requested the, respondent/plaintiff to deliver the property to her custody to enable her to carry out the demolition and reconstruction work. The revision petitioner/defendant executed an agreement dated 15.02.2006 agreeing to complete the construction and handing over the reconstructed shop within four months from the date of delivery of vacant possession. According to the agreement, the respondent/plaintiff is entitled to have an extent of 650 sq.ft. of carpet area i.e., 325 sq.ft. in ground floor and 325 sq.ft. in mezzanine floor at south-west direction already occupied by the respondent/plaintiff for A monthly rent of Rs.4,500/-. Only on the basis of the agreement dated 15.02.2006, the respondent/plaintiff handed over the possession of the suit property. But, the revision petitioner/defendant breached the terms and conditions of the said agreement and delayed the handing over of the constructed shop. To protect himself, the respondent/plaintiff earlier filed a Suit in O.S. No.7549 of 2006 on the file of the VI Assistant Civil Court. In that Suit, an application in I.A. No.16784 2006 was filed seeking the relief of interim injunction, Restraining the revision petitioner/defendant from putting up any construction except as per the provisions Contained in the agreement.

In that Suit, the learned VI Assistant Civil Judge observed that only a Suit for specific performance would lie as per Section 41(h) of the Transfer of Property Act and accordingly, the respondent/plaintiff has filed this Suit in O.S. No.1959 of 2007 for the aforesaid reliefs.

5. Pending O.S. No.1959 of 2007, the revision petitioner/defendant filed an Application in I.A.No.11433 of 2007 under Order 7, Rule 11 C.P.C. to reject the Plaint. In the affidavit filed in support of 1.A. No.11433 of 2007, the revision petitioner/defendant stated that already a Suit in O.S. No.7549 of 2006 has been filed by the respondent/plaintiff restraining him from putting up any construction in violation of the alleged agreement dated 15.02.2006. No leave was obtained by the respondent/plaintiff in O.S. No.7549 of 2006, to sue the relief