An unregistered and unstamped MOU cannot confer enforceable rights, and without ownership or possession, a claim for permanent injunction is unsustainable.

Judgment :

Sandeep Jain, J.

1. The instant first appeal has been filed by the plaintiff under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the CPC against the impugned order dated 13.3.2020 passed by the Court of Civil Judge(Senior Division), Allahabad in O.S. No. 342 of 2019 Messers Sai Dham Apartments and another Vs. Ravi Kumar Mehrotra and others, whereby plaintiffs interim injunction application no. 6-C under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC has been rejected.

Plaint Case

2. Factual matrix is that the plaintiff appellant filed O.S. No. 342 of 2019 in the lower court with the averments that the plaintiff no.1 Messers Sai Dham Apartments is a registered partnership firm and Rajesh Kumar Gupta is its Chief Executive Officer. Plaintiff no. 2 Messers Paras Presidency is also a registered partnership firm of which Sanjiv Jain is a partner.

3. It was further averred that freehold plot numbers YY/1,YY/2,YY/3 and YY/4, the details of which were mentioned in the plaint, the combined area of which was described as letters ABCD in the plaint map, hereinafter called the disputed land, was owned by Puran Chand Mehrotra, defendant no.1 Ravi Kumar Mehrotra and defendant no.2 Smt. Rashmi Mehrotra along with the house existing thereon. It was further averred that the above owners of the land, used to run Volkswagen car showroom on it and a workshop was also situated on this land. Puran Chand Mehrotra, was the father of Ravi Kumar Mehrotra and father-in-law of Smt. Rashmi Mehrotra, who died on 15.3.2017. It was averred that at present the defendant no.1 & 2 are the owners of the disputed property.

4. It was further averred by the plaintiffs that the above land owners were interested to raise a multi-storey residential complex over their aforesaid plot measuring 3251.29 m², the details of which have been mentioned at the foot of the plaint and which was earmarked by letters ABCD in the plaint map. It was further averred that the plaintiff no.1 firm is a builder and the above land owners negotiated with it through its Chief Executive Officer/Partner Rajesh Kumar Gupta to raise multi storeyed residential complex over the said land, who gave a proposal on behalf of plaintiff no.1, to construct the multi-storeyed residential complex on the said land of the aforesaid owners investing the money of the plaintiff no.1. It was further averred by the plaintiffs that the land owners agreed and accepted the proposal of the plaintiff no.1.

5. It was further averred that the above land owners namely late Puran Chand Mehrotra, Ravi Kumar Mehrotra and Smt. Rashmi Mehrotra entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on 30.3.2014 with plaintiff No.2, which is a firm promoted by plaintiff no.1 , to raise multi storeyed residential complex over the disputed land and on behalf of all the land owners, the MOU was signed by Ravi Kumar Mehrotra. The MOU included the heirs, executors and assignees of the land owners and the plaintiffs.

6. It was further averred that before executing the said MOU, the land owners had received Rs. 2 crores from the plaintiffs, the details of which were 2 crores from the plaintiffs, the details of which were provided in the plaint. The proposed residential flats/houses were to be constructed by the plaintiffs as per plan sanctioned by Allahabad Development Authority(ADA), Allahabad now Prayagraj Development Authority(PDA). It was further averred that the plaintiff no.2 paid Rs. 2 crores from the plaintiffs, the details