TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 845X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith possession in Village pahani dt.25.06.2019 in respect of the subject property shows the names of the respondents and not the name of the appellant. The instant suit has been filed on 06.07.2020, long after the respondents obtained the interim injunction orders on 06.09.2019 in IA No.682 of 2019 in OS No. 108 of 2019 - On the pretext that there is no mention of delivery of possession in Ex.P1 Agreement of Sale, it is not open to the appellant to contend that he continued to be in possession particularly when such alleged possession is not supported by revenue records such as pahanies. The Court below did not commit any error in refusing to grant temporary injunction in favour of the appellant - Appeal dismissed. - Civil Miscellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed an Agreement of Sale Ex.P1 dt.02.07.2016 in favour of the respondents after receiving ₹ 5,00,000/- as advance with a specific condition that the respondents should pay the balance sale consideration of ₹ 25,00,000/- within six months from the date of the Agreement of Sale. He alleged that the respondents did not choose to perform their part of the contract and that they had committed breach of the contract and it became unenforceable. 6. The appellant also contended that he advanced a hand loan of ₹ 20,00,000/- to the 1st respondent and his wife on 02.12.2017 to help them to meet certain financial commitments as they had promised to repay it within three months; that the 1st respondent s wife executed a promissory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tor, Yadadri-Bhongir District and it is pending. 10. The appellant contended that the respondents obtained interim injunction on 01.07.2019 in I.A.No.682 of 2019 in O.S.No.108 of 2019 to restrain the appellant from alienating the suit schedule property to third parties; that they came to the land on 10.07.2019 and tried to trespass into it; and they were prevented by the appellant with the help of his relatives. 11. He further contended that on 18.07.2019 again the respondents came to the suit schedule property with anti-social elements and assaulted him, and he lodged a complaint with police station Rajapet, but the Station House Officer refused to register the complaint stating that the matter is of civil nature. 12. The ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat their names have been mutated in the pahani showing that they are in possession of the suit schedule property. 16. They alleged that within the stipulated period they approached the appellant and demanded him to receive the balance sale consideration amount and to execute regular registered sale deed in their favour in respect of the suit schedule property as per the Agreement of Sale, but the appellant did not do so. 17. They alleged that due to escalation of land prices in the vicinity of the suit schedule property, and seeing the developments made by the respondents, the appellant did not come forward to perform his part of the agreement as per the Agreement, and so they filed O.S.No.108 of 2019 for specific performance and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owners thereof and neither the appellant nor his legal heirs would have any right over the said property. 24. It then noted that the point to be considered is only with respect to the possession of the suit schedule property. 25. It also noted that the land appears to be open land in view of the photographs filed by both parties, but the respondents are shown in the possessory column of the suit schedule property as per the Village pahani Ex.P5 dt.25.06.2016, and as per Ex.P7 order dt.10.05.2019 in Appeal No.D/1458/2019 and also Exs.R2 to R6 issued on 17.08.2020. 26. The Court below then considered the plea of the appellant that the revenue records were brought into existence by respondents taking help of the revenue authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be in possession of the suit schedule property. Consideration by the Court 30. Since the appellant is seeking temporary injunction against the respondents contending that he is in possession of the suit schedule property, the burden is on the appellant to first establish that he continues to be in possession of the suit schedule property. Such possession in respect of agricultural land is normally reflected in the Village pahanies. 31. Even according to the appellant, the column dealing with possession in Village pahani dt.25.06.2019 in respect of the subject property shows the names of the respondents and not the name of the appellant. 32. This was challenged by the appellant before the Revenue Divisional Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|