1 ao544.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Appeal from Order No. 544 of 2011 WITH Civil Application No. 765 of 2011 IN AO No. 544 of 2011 M/s. Fiza Construction Company ....Appellant v/s. Mr. Jayram Gopal Thakur & ors. ....Respondent Mr. Uday P. Warunjikar for the appellant. Mr. P.K. Dhakepalkar, Sr. Counsel i/b. A.S. Patil for respondent no.1. Mr. Sachin Kadam for respondents 3-5. CORAM: R.M. BORDE, J. 23rd November, 2011 PC: The application tendered by the plaintiff-appellant herein at exhibit 5 seeking a restraint order against the defendants restraining them from creating third party interest in relation to the suit property has been turned down by the trial Court in view of the order passed on 25th April, 2011. It is the case of the plaintiff that he entered into an agreement with the defendant for transfer of plot admeasuring 2450 sq. mtrs. which was to be allotted to the defendants in view of acquisition of certain property by the CIDCO Authorities. The consideration amount was prescribed at Rs. 73,50,000/-. The plaintiff claims to have paid a sum of Rs. 42,46,000/-. The defendants executed sale deed in respect of plot admeasuring 1250 sq. mtrs. However, there was denial in respect of execution of sale deed in respect of balance plot of land. As such the plaintiff was constrained to file a suit claiming specific performance of the agreement. The plaintiff also claims for issuance of restraint order hereby restraining the defendants from creating third party interest in relation to suit 2 ao544.11.sxw property. 2. The defendants appeared and resisted the suit by filing written- statement. The defendants seriously controverted the legality of the notarized agreement and contended that what was agreed to be transferred was merely 1250 sq. mtrs. area and not a plot admeasuring 2450 sq. mtrs. as contended by the defendants. An area to the extent of Rs. 1250 sq. mtrs. has already been transferred by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. The figure mentioned in the agreement in respect of area according to defendants is interpolation. The defendants admit to have received an amount of Rs. 24,25,000/- which was paid by way of cheque. The defendants denied the contention raised by the plaintiff in respect of payment of amount of Rs. 18,21,000/- by cash. The trial Court after considering rival contentions was pleased to reject the application tendered by the plaintiff. 3. The question raised in the suit relating to authenticity and correctness of the agreement is required to be dealt with by the trial Court during course of trial. It is not disputed that an amount of Rs. 24,25,000/- has been received in furtherance of the agreement and a plot area to the extent of 1250 sq. mtrs. has been transferred to defendants. The agreement placed on record is a composite agreement in respect of plot of land admeasuring 2450 sq. mtrs. The questions raised by the parties in the suit are required to be dealt with in detail and the findings are required to be recorded by the trial Court while deciding the suit. The instant suit is presented by the plaintiff seeking specific performance of the agreement. It is necessary to maintain status-quo in respect of property involved in the litigation and creation of third party interest during the pendency of the suit is likely to create further complications. At the sametime the plaintiff is also required to be put to certain conditions in respect of deposit of balance of consideration amount in the Court. The following 3 ao544.11.sxw order would meet the ends of justice:- The plaintiff is directed to deposit balance amount of Rs. 49,25,000/- before the trial Court within a period of 8 weeks from today. Subject to deposit of amount as directed by this Court, the defendants are restrained from creating third party interest in relation to the suit property during the pendency and final disposal of the suit. The Appeal from Order stands allowed accordingly. In view of facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs. The trial Court is directed to decide the suit as expeditiously as possible preferably by end of April 2011. The amount that would be deposited by the plaintiff before the trial Court shall be invested in fixed deposit in a nationalized Bank for a period until disposal of the suit. It is needless to mention that in case of failure to deposit the amount as directed, the order passed by this Court shall stand revoked automatically without reference to the Court. (R.M.BORDE, J)