Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 106 (CAL)

Naren Chandra Ghosh v. Niranjan Karmakar

2017-01-20

ISHAN CHANDRA DAS, JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA

body2017
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J. 1. By the impugned order, plaintiff’s prayer for ad interim order of injunction for restraining the defendant/respondent from transferring and/or alienating and/or creating any third party interest in the suit property was refused by the learned Trial Judge. Even the prayer for maintenance of status quo as regards possession of the parties in the suit property was refused by the learned Trial Judge. The instant first miscellaneous appeal is directed against the said order passed by the learned Trial Judge. 2. An interim order of injunction was prayed by the plaintiff/appellant in the suit for specific performance of contract. It is stated by the plaintiff/appellant that pursuant to the agreement entered into between the parties, the plaintiff has paid the entire consideration money to the defendant/respondent for the said transaction. Since the defendant/respondent subsequently refused to execute the deed of conveyance for transferring his interest in the said suit property in favour of the plaintiff/appellant, the plaintiff filed the instant suit for specific performance of contract. Plaintiff claims that he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and he is still ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. 3. After hearing the learned advocates appearing for the parties and after considering the pleadings made out by the plaintiff in the application for temporary injunction and the plaint, we are of the view that the plaintiff/appellant has been able to make out a prima facie case for going to trial. If during the pendency of the plaintiff’s application for temporary injunction, the defendant/respondent transfers and/or sells and/or creates any third party interest in the suit property, there will be every possibility of multiplication of proceeding. To avoid multiplicity of proceeding, we feel that the parties should maintain status quo as regards transfer and/or alienation and/or creation of any third party interest in the suit property. 4. We are also of the view that status quo with regard to the possession of the parties in the suit property should also be maintained during the pendency of the plaintiff’s application for temporary injunction. 5. Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal by setting aside the impugned order. 4. We are also of the view that status quo with regard to the possession of the parties in the suit property should also be maintained during the pendency of the plaintiff’s application for temporary injunction. 5. Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal by setting aside the impugned order. Parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to transfer and/or alienation and/or creation of any third party interest and/or their possession in the suit property as on date till the disposal of the plaintiff’s application for temporary injunction. 6. Leave is granted to the defendant/respondent to file affidavit-in-opposition to the plaintiff’s application for temporary injunction within two weeks from date; reply, if any, be filed by the plaintiff/appellant within a week thereafter. 7. We request the learned Trial Judge to dispose of the plaintiff’s application for temporary injunction as early as possible, but preferably by the end of March 2017 without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties. 8. It is made clear that the interim arrangement which is made by this Court hereinabove is only made for the purpose of disposal of this appeal which is directed against an order of refusal to grant ad interim injunction by the learned Trial Judge. As such, the learned Trial Judge is absolutely free to dispose of the plaintiff’s application for temporary injunction on its own merit without being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove or the interim arrangement made hereinabove. 9. The appeal and the application for stay being CAN 9695 of 2016, thus, stand disposed of. 10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.