CR No.2954 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2954 of 2007 Date of Decision: 30.7.2009 Vision Comptech Ltd. & Anr. ..Petitioners Vs. Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr. ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod K.Sharma Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Sr. Advocate, with Mr.Amit Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Sanjay Vij, Advocate, for the respondents. Vinod K.Sharma,J. (Oral) This order shall dispose of CR Nos.2954, 2953, 2955 and 2956 of 2007, all titled Vision Comptech Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr., as they arise out of the order passed by the learned trial court on an application moved by Vision Comptech Ltd. & Anr. under section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code) for stay of suit filed by M/s Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr., and on an application moved by Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr., under section 151 of the Code for striking out the defence of Vision CR No.2954 of 2007 2 Comptech Ltd. & Anr. M/s Comptech Ltd. & Anr., petitioners in civil revisions filed a suit for specific performance claiming that they were entitled to purchase the property under the agreement entered into with M/s Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. Written statement was filed disputing the claim of M/s Vision Comptech Ltd. & Anr.. M/s Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr., filed a suit for possession and claimed recovery on account of lease money/compensation for use and occupation against Vision Comptech Ltd. & Anr., by claiming themselves to be lessor of the property in dispute. Learned trial court dismissed the application under section 10 of the Code, whereas allowed the application moved by M/s Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr., by directing M/s Vision Comptech Ltd. & Anr., to deposit the lease money. It is not in dispute that all the cases have been consolidated and are being tried together, the object of filing application under section 10 of the Code is, therefore lost. This Court while issuing notice of motion was pleased to pass the following order:- “ Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that they have already filed a suit for specific performance which is pending in relation to the properties not only on the 3rd floor but as well as 4th floor, for which there is reflection in the lease CR No.2954 of 2007 3 agreement Annexure P-2 and has also referred to a communication of the Ansal Properties Annexure P-12, in this context. He has also pointed out that present suits are counter blast to the said suit filed by the petitioners. Notice of motion. Mr.Deepak Sibal, counsel for the caveators accepts notice and seeks time. Adjourned to 30.7.2007. The request of the petitioners to stay the proceedings of the suit stands declined, at this stage. However, they, instead of making the payment of rent @ Rs.2,78,901/- per month from 1.6.2005 or from the date it is due till date, shall furnish a bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the trial court within 30 days from today.” Learned counsel for the parties agree that these revision petitions may be disposed of by making the motion order dated 28.5.2007 absolute. It is also pointed out that bank guarantee in pursuance to the order of this court already stands furnished. In view of the stand taken by the counsel for the parties, these revision petitions are disposed of by making order dated 28.5.2007 absolute. The bank guarantee shall be kept enforceable during the pendency of the suit. 30.07. 2009 (Vinod K.Sharma) rp Judge