CR No.3318 of 2009(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 3318 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 01, 2009 Anil Gambhir ...........Petitioner Versus Roshan Lal ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Sabina Present: Dr.Anmol Rattan Singh Sidhu, Senior Advocate with Mr.V.D.Goel,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Jagmohan Singh Chowdhry, Senior Advocate with Mr.F.S.Virk, Advocate for the respondent -- Sabina, J. (oral) C.M. No.26484-CII of 2009 Application is allowed as prayed for and the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the submissions made on 26.10.2009 re: execution of sale deed . C.R.No.3318 of 2009 Roshan Lal-respondent filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell. Along with suit, an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed. The learned trial Court vide order dated 2.5.2006,while allowing the application for temporary injunction, restrained the defendant from alienating the suit CR No.3318 of 2009(O&M) 2 property to any one else other than the plaintiff. The said order was maintained by the Additional District Judge in appeal vide order dated 25.3.2009. Hence, the present revision petition. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that this petition deserves to be dismissed. The execution of the agreement to sell in question is not in dispute. The plea taken by the petitioner-defendant in the suit is that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. Although the principle of lis pendens will apply yet to avoid the multiplicity of the litigation, the Courts below rightly restrained the petitioner from alienating the suit property to any one else other than the plaintiff during the pendency of the suit. The impugned order cannot be said to be perverse which would warrant interference by this Court. Dismissed. ( Sabina ) Judge December 01, 2009 arya