IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

Monday, the Twenty Eighth day of February Two Thousand Twenty Two

PRESENT

THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

AND

THE HON`BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

CMP.NO.1909 OF 2022

IN AS.NO.45 OF 2022

A.SRINIVASAN

[ PETITIONER ]

Vs

1 D.PRABHAVATHI

[ RESPONDENTS ]

2 B.VADIVEL

3 THE SUB REGISTRAR II

O/O.SUB REGISTRAR,

181, 3RD GANDHI ROAD,

ARAKKONAM,

RANIPET DISTRICT.

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and

in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to

grant an order of interim injunction restraining the 2^nd

Respondent, his men and agents from alienating / encumbering the

suit schedule property O.S.No.17 of 2017 on the file of the Ld. II

Additional District Judge, Vellore at Ranipet, (in CMP.NO.1909 OF

2022) pending disposal of the above AS.NO.45 OF 2022.

Order : This miscellaneous petition coming on this day for

hearing upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in

support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.P.KRISHNAN,

Advocate for the petitioner, the court made the following order:-

The appellant/plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.17 of 2017 on

the file of the II Additional District Court, Vellore at Ranipet

for specific performance and alternatively, for refund of the

amount paid by him.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.The trial Court, by its judgment and decree dated 29.09.2021,

dismissed the suit in respect of the relief for specific

performance and decreed the alternate prayer for refund of the

amount paid by the plaintiff. Challenging the rejection of the

relief of specific performance, the plaintiff has filed the above

appeal.

3.In the First Appeal, the petitioner/ appellant has also filed

a Miscellaneous Petition in C.M.P.No.1909 of 2022 seeking for

injuction restraining the 2^nd

respondent from alienating/

encumbering the suit property.

4.When the plaintiff's suit for specific performance has been

dismissed by the trial Court, we are not inclined to grant an order

of injunction restraining the 2^nd respondent from alienating or

encumbering the suit property. In the case of the appellant

succeeding in the appeal, he can get back the property. It is

needless to say that any encumberance or alienation made by the 2nd

respondent is hit by Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act.

In such view of the matter, the petition stands dismissed.

-sd/-

28/02/2022

/ TRUE COPY /

Sub-Assistant Registrar ( Statistics / C.S. )

High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO

THE II ADDITIONAL

DISTRICT JUDGE,

RANIPET, VELLORE.

Order

in

CMP.NO.1909 OF 2022

IN AS.NO.45 OF 2022

Date :28/02/2022

From 26.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified

copies of the Interim Orders in this format

DPK(02/03/2022)

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/