https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310522 Interim possession in a specific performance suit was refused because the allotment letter had not been shown to have matured into a concluded contract; essential terms, including final price and additional charges, were still unsettled, so the plaintiff had not established a strong prima facie case or special equity for a receiver. The Court nevertheless preserved the property by restraining alienation, mortgage, or creation of third-party interests during the suit. On the pleadings, the plaint disclosed a cause of action against defendant No. 2, because specific averments linked him to the alleged cancellation and frustration of rights; at the Order VII Rule 11 stage, those allegations had to be taken as pleaded. The request to reject the plaint or delete defendant No. 2 was therefore declined. en-us Wed, 29 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Oct 2023 11:54:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310522 Interim possession in a specific performance suit was refused because the allotment letter had not been shown to have matured into a concluded contract; essential terms, including final price and additional charges, were still unsettled, so the plaintiff had not established a strong prima facie case or special equity for a receiver. The Court nevertheless preserved the property by restraining alienation, mortgage, or creation of third-party interests during the suit. On the pleadings, the plaint disclosed a cause of action against defendant No. 2, because specific averments linked him to the alleged cancellation and frustration of rights; at the Order VII Rule 11 stage, those allegations had to be taken as pleaded. The request to reject the plaint or delete defendant No. 2 was therefore declined. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 29 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310522