J. Chandramouli Goud vs Madda Vijaya Reddy
2022 Latest Caselaw 3885 Tel

                 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
                                 AND
               HON'BLE SMT DR.JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI


                         I.A.NO.1 OF 2022
                               AND
            CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.289 of 2021

                            Date:26.07.2022

Between:

J. Chandramouli Goud, S/o.Late J. Mallesham Goud,
Age : 64 yrs, Occu : Business,
R/o.H.No.2-1-80/1, Pedda Cherlapalli,
Kapra Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District
                                             .....Appellant

     And

Madda Vijaya Reddy, S/o. Late Madda Kista Reddy,
Age 64 yrs, Occu : Agriculture,
R/o.H.No.9-83/1, Ranjole Village,
Zaheerabad Mandal, Medak District.

                                              .....Respondent

The Court made the following:

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO AND HON'BLE SMT DR.JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI

I.A.NO.1 OF 2022 AND CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.289 of 2021

COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Naveen Rao)

This appeal is preferred against the order dated 10.02.2021 passed in

I.A.No.503 of 2020 in O.S.No.333 of 2020 pending on the file of III Additional

District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. I.A.No.503 of 2020 was

filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C. for grant of temporary

injunction. On consideration of the matter, the trial Court declined to grant

injunction as prayed and dismissed the I.A.

2. Heard Sri S.Surender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Sri Janardhan Reddy Kotha, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. Briefly noted, the respondent herein is the owner of suit schedule

land. The appellant and respondent entered into an agreement of sale on

29.04.2019. At the time of entering into agreement of sale, the appellant

herein paid Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs only) as advance. The total

sale consideration is Rs.6,50,00,000/- (Rupees Six Crores Fifty lakhs only),

while the respondent alleges that the appellant inspite of demand made,

failed to pay balance sale consideration. The appellant contends that as the

respondent has not cleared the litigation pending on the subject property,

the question of appellant paying balance sale consideration does not arise.

4. The fact remains that it is the appellant who filed suit praying to grant

decree of specific performance of agreement of sale. It is appropriate to note

that the day on which agreement of sale was entered into, there was also a

settlement recorded between the parties. According to the agreement of

sale, the owner of property shall ensure that the litigation is contested by

him at his own costs on the subject property. This settlement clearly

discloses that the appellant was aware of the litigation pending against the

property in issue. Further the appellant did not insist for any condition for

resolution of settlement as pre-condition for payment of balance sale

consideration. Admittedly, only Rs.50,00,000/- was paid as advance and no

further amount was paid towards compliance of agreement of sale by the

plaintiff.

5. On 16.07.2021, this Court granted interim injunction in I.A.No.1 of

2021. Praying to vacate the said interim injunction, I.A.No.1 of 2022 is filed

by the respondent/defendant. We have heard both counsel in the main

appeal itself.

6. Having regard to the facts in issue and on due consideration of the

respective submissions, the trial Court has not found balance of

convenience and prima-facie case in favour of the appellant and dismissed

I.A.No.503 of 2020. Having regard to the facts of this case, we do not see

any error in the decision of trial Court in rejecting the I.A., to grant

temporary injunction.

7. Having regard to the above, the interim order granted on 16.07.2021

is vacated. I.A.No.1 of 2022 is allowed. Consequently, the Civil

Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. However, it is made clear that any

transaction that takes place on the subject property shall abide the result of

O.S.No.333 of 2020. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J

_________________________ DR. G.RADHA RANI, J 26th July, 2022 Rds