IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI,
ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
Case No. of 2025
IN THE MATTER OF:
_________________________& Anr. …Plaintiffs
Versus
________________________________ …Defendant
APPLICATION FOR UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 ALONG WITH UNDER S. 151 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, SEEKING TEMPORARY/ INTERIM INJUNCTION IN THE SUIT PROPERTY
The Plaintiffs have filed the accompanying Suit for Specific Performance of Agreement to Sell dated ______.2025, seeking direction from the Hon’ble Court to execute sale deed in favour of Plaintiffs.
That the Plaintiffs have filed the accompanying Suit for Specific Performance, Permanent Injunction and Costs against the Defendant in respect of property bearing _______________________________, New Delhi-110059, along with all its roof/terrace rights and freehold rights (hereinafter “the suit property”).
That the Defendant executed a written Agreement to Sell dated ________.2025 in favour of the Plaintiffs for a total sale consideration of 3,50,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crores Fifty Lakhs only), out of which Rs.35,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty-Five Lakhs) has already been paid as earnest money.
That the Plaintiffs have always been ready and willing to perform their part of the contract, and are still ready to tender the balance sale consideration. However, the Defendant has failed, neglected and refused to execute the sale deed despite repeated requests and legal notice.
That the Plaintiffs are already in possession of the suit property and are running a school therein in terms of the Agreement, and have invested substantial amounts in its development.
That the Plaintiffs have serious apprehension that the Defendant is now attempting to sell, transfer, alienate, mortgage, or create third-party interest in the suit property, contrary to the subsisting Agreement, only to defeat the lawful rights of the Plaintiffs.
That if the Defendant succeeds in creating third-party rights, the very subject matter of the suit will be defeated, and the Plaintiffs shall suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in monetary terms, and the suit shall become infructuous.
That the Plaintiffs have a prima facie case made out in their favour, supported by the Agreement to Sell, payment receipts, and exchange of notices. the balance of convenience also lies in favour of the Plaintiffs, who have paid substantial money, are in possession, and are ready to perform their reciprocal obligations, while the Defendant is acting in breach with mala fide intentions.
That if the interim protection is not granted, the Defendant may cause illegal construction/trespass/transfer, thereby rendering the very purpose of the suit infructuous.
Unless restrained, the Defendants may deal with the property in violation of the Agreement, causing multiplicity of proceedings and defeating the ends of justice
PRAYER
In view of the above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to:
- Pass an order of temporary injunction restraining the Defendant from selling, alienating, transferring, parting with possession, or creating any third-party rights in the suit property ______________________________________, during the pendency of the present suit;
- Pass such further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Applicant
Through Counsels
Advocates for the Plaintiffs
Date:
Place: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI,
ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
Case No. of 2025
IN THE MATTER OF:
_______________________ & Anr. …Plaintiffs
Versus
______________________________ …Defendant
AFFIDAVIT
I, Shalini Awasthi aged about ____ years W/o ___________ R/o ________________________, the deponent, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as hereunder:
- That I being plaintiff no.2 in the above matter, have read and understood the contents of the accompanying application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 along with S.151 of Civil Procedure Code, which has been drafted by my counsels under my instruction.
- That I say the paras of the application are true to my personal knowledge and belief and the contents of the foregoing plaint may be read as part and parcel of the Affidavit and has not been repeated here for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at Delhi on this ______________ do hereby verify that the contents of the foregoing Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed. So, please help me God.
DEPONENT
Plaintiffs Seek Interim Injunction in Property Dispute Before Delhi High Court
In an ongoing civil dispute over the sale of immovable property in West Delhi, the plaintiffs, _________ and another, have approached the High Court of Delhi under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), seeking an interim injunction to restrain the defendant, ______, from transferring, selling, or creating third-party interests in the suit property pending the final disposal of the case.
Background of the Case
The plaintiffs have filed a suit for specific performance of an Agreement to Sell dated _______ 2025, concerning the property located at ____________________, New Delhi–110059. The agreement, executed between the parties, stipulates a total sale consideration of ₹3.5 crore, out of which ₹35 lakh has already been paid as earnest money.
According to the plaintiffs, they are already in possession of the suit property and are running a school on the premises in terms of the agreement. They claim to have invested substantial amounts in the improvement and development of the property.
Allegations Against the Defendant
The plaintiffs contend that the defendant has failed and neglected to execute the sale deed, despite repeated requests and the issuance of a legal notice. They allege that the defendant is now attempting to alienate or encumber the property in violation of the existing agreement, with the mala fide intention of defeating the plaintiffs’ lawful rights.
It has been argued that any such act by the defendant would not only frustrate the pending suit but also cause irreparable harm to the plaintiffs, which cannot be compensated monetarily.
Grounds for Interim Relief
The plaintiffs have sought temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, asserting that:
-
They have a prima facie case supported by documentary evidence, including the Agreement to Sell, payment receipts, and exchange of notices.
-
The balance of convenience lies in their favour as they have paid a substantial amount and are in possession of the property.
-
If injunction is not granted, they will suffer irreparable injury, and the suit itself may become infructuous due to the possible creation of third-party rights.
Relief Sought
Through the present application, the plaintiffs have prayed that the Hon’ble Court be pleased to:
-
Restrict the defendant from selling, alienating, transferring, or parting with possession of the suit property during the pendency of the suit; and
-
Pass any other order deemed fit in the interest of justice.
Affidavit in Support
An affidavit has been filed by Ms. _________, plaintiff no. 2, affirming the truthfulness of the contents of the application and verifying that it was drafted under her instructions. She has declared that all statements made are true to her personal knowledge and belief.
Legal Perspective
The application reflects the standard practice in civil litigation concerning property disputes, where a party seeks interim protection to maintain the status quo until the main suit is adjudicated.
The court, before granting such relief, typically examines the existence of a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable harm—the three foundational pillars of injunction jurisprudence.
If the Delhi High Court is satisfied that these conditions are met, it may pass an interim order restraining the defendant from dealing with the property, thereby preserving the subject matter of the litigation.
Conclusion
The outcome of this case will hinge on whether the plaintiffs can convincingly demonstrate their readiness and willingness to perform their contractual obligations and establish that the defendant’s actions threaten to defeat their legitimate rights under the Agreement to Sell.
The Court’s decision on the interim injunction will be crucial in determining the immediate control and protection of the property while the substantive issues are adjudicated.
