JUDGMENT :

Ms.Nidhi Gupta, J. - Present revision petition has been filed by the defendant seeking setting aside of order dated 02.05.2019 (Annexure P1) passed by ld. Single Judge (Sr. Division) Mohali, whereby application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as `CPC')for rejection of the plaint on the ground that no cause of action to file the present suit has arisen nor has been disclosed, has been dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner and plaintiff/respondent No.1 herein are cousin brothers who had entered into a lease agreement dated 22.10.2013, in pursuance to which plaintiff had invested a sum of Rs.60 lacs into the business of the petitioner/defendant No.1, and respondent No.1/plaintiff had issued a cheque dated 31.08.2015 (Annexure P3) in favor of the petitioner. As there was subsequently a dispute between the parties, plaintiff/respondent No.1 filed Civil Suit bearing CS No.512 of 2018 titled as ` Jasmeet Singh Vs Amandeep Singh Sra and others '(Annexure P5). By way of the said civil suit, respondent No.1/plaintiff sought: a) specific performance of agreement to sell dated 31.08.2015; as also sought the relief of b) declaration that the sale deed executed by the petitioner in favour of defendants No.2 and 3 pertaining to the property in question is null and void; and c) suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from selling, alienating and mortgaging the suit property during the pendency of the civil suit. It is in this civil suit that the petitioner filed the present application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC (Annexure P6) for rejection of the plaint on the ground that the suit does not disclose any cause of action. Vide the impugned order dated 02.05.2019 (Annexure P1), the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Mohali has dismissed the above said application of the petitioner. Hence, present revision petition.

3(i) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that perusal of the plaint (Annexure P5) shows that the same does not disclose any cause of action. It is submitted that vide the said suit the plaintiff is seeking specific performance of alleged agreement to sell dated 31.08.2015 whereas, in the said agreement dated 31.08.2015, the column regarding payment etc. is blank, and there is overwriting.

3(ii) It is further submitted that the petitioner and respondent No.1/plaintiff are closely related to each other being first cousins and it is for this reason that the present agreement dated 31.08.2015 was executed wherein the columns were left blank. It is stated that the petitioner had no intention to sell the suit property nor was there any privity of contract qua the selling of the property and therefore, payment of Rs.60 lacs was made through cheque in favour of the petitioner by respondent No.1. It is submitted that accordingly the present suit filed by the respondent No.1 is barred in view of Sections 12 , 14, 16 & 21 of the SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT , 1963 as once the respondent No.1 can be compensated in terms of money then the same cannot be utilized for the purpose of specific performance.

3(iii) It is further submitted that the present suit ought to have been rejected also in view of Section 23 of the Indian CONTRACT ACT , 1872 as any agreement without consideration, is void. It is submitted that admittedly in the present agreement dated 31.08.2015, it has only been mentioned that consideration has been paid but there is no mention of Rs.60 lacs paid through cheque, which is not reflected in the agreement.

4. No other argument is made on behalf of the counsel for