Dismissed

Rudrapati Yerraiah Naidu v. G.Naga Sreelakshmi

Telangana HC25 Apr 2013CMA/321/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal challenged a temporary injunction order in a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the injunction to prevent alienation of the suit property during the pendency of the trial where a strong prima facie case existed. The trial court was directed to dispose of the suit by year-end.

What did the court decide?

The civil miscellaneous appeal was dismissed; no order as to costs granted.

Rudrapati Yerraiah Naidu Vs G.Naga Sreelakshmi — Specific Performance | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY &

¶2

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT

¶3

C.M.A.No.321 OF 2013

¶4

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice LNR,J)

¶5

The 1^st respondent filed O.S.No.28 of 2012 in the Court of the II-Additional District Judge, Madanapalle against the appellants and the 2^nd respondent for the relief of specific performance of agreement of sale dated 05.05.2010. It was pleaded that the suit schedule property was agreed to be sold by the appellants for a consideration of Rs.50 lakhs and out of it, a sum of Rs.49 lakhs was paid on the date of agreement itself. It was further pleaded that the pattadar passbooks and title deeds in original were handed over to the 1^st respondent.

¶6

The grievance of the 1^st respondent was that the appellants did not execute the sale deed in spite of repeated demands.

¶7

The appellants have also filed written statement opposing the suit.

¶8

The 1^st respondent filed I.A.No.239 of 2012 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC with a prayer to restrain the appellants from alienating the suit schedule property. It was pleaded that in case the property is sold, even while the suit is pending, several complications would arise. Counter was filed by the appellants in I.A.

¶9

After hearing both parties, the trial Court allowed the

¶10

I.A., through order dated 13.12.2012. Hence, this appeal under Order LXIII Rule 1 CPC.

¶11

Heard Sri M.Radha Krishna, learned counsel for the appellants.

¶12

The suit was based upon an agreement of sale dated 05.05.2010. The question as to whether the appellants executed the agreement of sale and received the consideration, needs to be examined at the time of trial of the suit. Along with the plaint, the

¶13

1^st respondent filed the original of the pattadar passbook and title deeds in respect of the suit schedule property. It naturally weighed with the trial Court and on finding prima case, the temporary injunction is granted.

¶14

The denial of the temporary injunction would lead to a situation where the appellant can sell the property and virtually nothing remains to be decided in the suit. Though the sales which take place during the pendency of the suit would be subject to the mandate under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, the creation of third party rights is fraught with its own complications. We are not inclined to interfere with the order of temporary injunction.

¶15

The civil miscellaneous appeal is accordingly dismissed. Since the pleadings are complete, the trial Court can take up the suit and make an endeavour to dispose of the same by the end of this year.

¶16

The miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed in this appeal

¶17

shall also stand disposed of.

¶18

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶19

_________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J

¶20

____________ S.V.BHATT, J 25^th April 2013 Lrkm

Rudrapati Yerraiah Naidu v. G.Naga Sreelakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rudrapati Yerraiah Naidu v. G.Naga Sreelakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Edara Ravi Kumar Vs Nallam Sridevi

Y.Venkateswara Rao Vs Smt. Y. Chetana [Jampala Chetana]

Chiluka Rajender Reddy , Tagore Reddy Vs Chiluka Gurva Reddy

Theme Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mohd. Suleman , Goremiya

R.Radha Vs P.Bhanu Prakash Reddy

Ch.Seshagiri Vs Ch.Srinivasulu