R. Subramanian, J.

The unsuccessful plaintiff in O.S.No.13661/10 is the Appellant. The said suit was originally filed in this Court as C.S. No.1007/2007 and the same was later transferred to the trial Court namely the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court - V, Chennai.

2. The suit was filed seeking a declaration and to set aside the sale deed dated 06.08.2007, alleged to have been executed by the plaintiff in favour of the first defendant and registered as Document No.2849/2007, on the file of the third respondent, Sub Registrar, Anna Nagar and for permanent injunction restraining defendants 1 and 2 from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit property.

3. According to the plaintiff, the suit property belongs to him, having been assigned to him by the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board. The said title is not in dispute. The plaintiff had entered into an agreement of sale with the first defendant on 22.04.2006, agreeing to sell the suit property for a consideration of Rs. 14,50,000/- and received advance of Rs. 4,50,000/-. Under the said agreement, the first defendant has agreed to pay the balance sale consideration, within a period of three months from the date of sale. Though the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, the first defendant was not ready and willing to pay the balance amount. Hence, the plaintiff informed the first defendant to take back the advance amount. However, the first defendant did not turn up.

4. It is further averred in the plaint that on 30.08.2006 the defendants 1 and 2 came to the plaintiff's house along with one Gopi, broker, who arranged the deal between the plaintiff and the first defendant, threatened the plaintiff and his sisters and obtained an undertaking affidavit in Rs. 100/- Non Judicial stamp paper, in and by which the plaintiff had agreed to repay a sum of Rs. 6,50,000/- on or before 09.09.2006 failing which, he would execute the sale deed on 11.09.2006 in favour of the first defendant. Though the first defendant had paid a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- as advance, the plaintiff agreed to return a sum of Rs. 6,50,000/- under threat. It is also claimed that on 30.08.2006, the defendants 1 and 2 forcibly trespassed into the plaintiff's house and threatened the plaintiff and his family members to sign an undertaking affidavit.

5. The plaintiff is said to have issued a legal notice to the first defendant on 08.09.2006 informing him that the agreement dated 22.04.2006 stands cancelled and requiring him not to indulge in any illegal activity of threatening the plaintiff. A reply was issued by the first defendant on 11.09.2006 claiming that the plaintiff had voluntarily signed the undertaking affidavit. Thereafter, the defendants 1 and 2 attempted to dispossess the plaintiff with the help of police and tried get a sale deed executed in favour of the first defendant. It is claimed that the plaintiff has lodged a complaint on 18.09.2006 with the Commissioner of Police and the same was forwarded to Assistant Commissioner of Police, Koyambedu for enquiry and before the Assistant Commissioner of Police the first defendant agreed to take back Rs. 4,50,000/-from the plaintiff and undertook not to disturb the plaintiff. Due to the threats by the defendants 1 and 2, the plaintiff was forced to stay away at Thiruvottiyur in his uncle's house and he lodged complaint with the police on 30.4.2007. Since, the police failed to take action, the plaintiff filed Crl.O.P.No.15911/2007 in this Court and a direction was issued by this Court. Thereafter, the plaintiff issued telegraphic notice to the Sub Registrar's office. It is further claimed that the defendant 1 and 2 had forcefully taken the plaintiff to the Sub Registrar's office at Anna Nagar, during December 2006 and had obtained the registered agreement of sale in favour of the second defendant.

6. It is further averred that the plaintiff, his wife, his mother-in-law and his son were kidnapped by