V.K. Jain, J.—This is a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 15th June, 2010 whereby the defendants agreed to sell the entire third floor with terrace rights of property No. 9, Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi to the plaintiffs for a consideration of Rs. 4,25,00,000. A sum of Rs. 50,00,000 was paid to the defendants at the time of execution of the agreement and the balance sale consideration was agreed to be paid on or before 15th August, 2010. The possession of the premises, the subject matter of the agreement, was agreed to be given to the plaintiffs at the time of registration of the sale deed, after receiving the full consideration.

2. It was stated in the agreement that the defendants have taken a home loan from the Bank of Baroda and that they had assured the plaintiffs that on or before the registration of sale deed, the loan will be returned to the bank and all installments in respect of the portion being sold to them would be cleared. Photocopies of all the relevant documents were handed over by the defendants to the plaintiffs at the time of execution of the agreement.

3. In terms of the aforesaid agreement dated 15th June, 2010, the plaintiffs made further payment of Rs.25,00,000 by way of a cheque in favour of the defendant No.1. Yet another payment of Rs.25,00,000 was made by the plaintiffs by way of a Cheque in favour of defendant No.3 Divij Infra Projects Private Limited, in which the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 were the directors. This according to the plaintiffs, was done on the request of defendant Nos. 1 and 2. It is alleged in the plaint that despite repeated requests from the plaintiffs, the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 did not provide No Dues Certificate from Bank of Baroda in respect of the home loan taken by them and sought some more time to perform their part of the contract in terms of the agreement dated 15th June, 2010. The request was acceded to by the plaintiffs, though they were always ready with the entire balance sale consideration and had also got a home loan of Rs.2,91,00,000 sanctioned from the Standard Chartered Bank on 31st July, 2010 and had also delivered the Copy of the sanction letter to defendant Nos. 1 and 2.

It is also alleged that at the time of payment of Rs.25,00,000 by way of the cheque in favour of defendant No.3, the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 had assured the plaintiffs that they would execute the sale deed on or before 31st October, 2010. According to the plaintiffs, defendant Nos. 1 and 2 did not come forward to execute the sale deed even by 10th November, 2010 and verbally agreed to sign an addendum dated 10th November, 2010 after fixing and finalizing the date by which the sale deed was to be executed in favour of the plaintiffs. They however did not sign the addendum. Since sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs has not been executed despite e-mails and legal notice sent to defendant Nos. 1 and 2, they are now seeking specific performance of the aforesaid agreement dated 15th June, 2010. The plaintiffs have sought an interim injunction restraining the defendants from creating any third party interest in the premises the matter of the agreement dated 15th June, 2010, during the pendency of the suit.

4. In their reply to the application, the defendants have admitted execution of the agreement dated 15th June, 2010 as also the receipt of Rs.1,00,00,000 from the plaintiffs. It is stated in the reply that as per the terms of the agreement, in case of or failure to obtain permission from the Bank of Baroda and get the documents registered in favour of the plaintiffs on or before 15th August, 2010, the defendants had a right to return the advance payment to the plaintiffs along with interest thereon @ 12.5% per annum on or before 15th September, 2010 and therefore, they had offered to refund the aforesaid advance money to the plaintiffs who refused to accept the same. It is further stated in the reply that the Bank of the defendants as not agreeable to release the third