1 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4346 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO.3161 OF 2007 United Enterprises & ors ....Plaintiffs V/s. Krishnaraj Nansey Chikhel & Ors ....Defendants Mr.Nitin G. Thakkar, Senior Counsel, i/b M/s Kirit N. Damania & Co. for the Plaintiff. Mr. Ryan D’souza i/b Mr. Jose George, for Defendant Nos 5 to 7. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 18TH NOVEMBER, 2009. P.C. :- 1. The suit is filed for the specific performance of an agreement dated 28th November, l985 by which Defendant Nos 1 to 4 agreed to sell the Plaintiffs, land admeasuring 2653.90 Sq meters for a consideration of Rs.55,00,000/-. 2. The execution of the agreement is not denied by any of the Defendants including Defendant Nos 5 to 7 who claim to be subsequent purchasers inter alia of the suit property. It is also admitted that a sum of Rs.54,00,000/- has been paid to the Vendors/Defendant Nos 1 to 5 and that the Plaintiffs have already developed the property by constructing buildings thereon. It needs only to be mentioned that Plaintiff Nos 2 to 4 transferred 2 their rights under the said agreement to Plaintiff No.1. 3. Defendant Nos 1 to 4 are absent. Defendant Nos 5 to 7 claim to have purchased the said plot from Defendant Nos 1 to 4 by a conveyance dated 12th July, 2006 for a consideration of Rs. 35,00,000/-. Defendant Nos 5 to 7 contend that the Plaintiffs failed and neglected to discharge the statutory obligations under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act and are, therefore, deemed to have abandoned their rights under the said agreement. 4. The Plaintiffs were put in possession of the said land on 28th August, l986. The agreement has been acted upon by the Plaintiffs and the Vendors. Most important is the fact that the Vendors received a sum of Rs.54,00,000/- out of the total consideration of Rs.55,00,000/-. The Plaintiffs have constructed buildings thereon. The flat purchasers have not at least in this proceeding raised any grievance against Plaintiffs. Defendant Nos 5 to 7 were aware of the Plaintiffs agreement. They cannot unilaterally claim to be entitled to discharge the plaintiffs’ obligations in law including under the Maharashtra Ownerships Flats Act. 5. In the circumstances, the Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer (a).