VIJAY ARORA Vs. ASHA WANTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Appellant/plaintiff has challenged the order passed on 28/07/1999 by learned Single Judge on the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2.

(2.) Feeling satisfied that the plaintiff/appellant was entitled to an ex-parte ad- interim order of injunction. Learned Single Judge while restraining both the parties from alienating, transferring the suit property bearing No. 21, Rajendra Park, New Delhi also placed a restraint with respect to property bearing No. 36/6, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi, alleged to be in the name of the wife of the plaintiff. Property bearing No. 36/6, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi is not the subject-matter of the suit, though a reference has been made by the plaintiff in the plaint that this property is 270 owned by his wife, who is also recorded as an owner in the records maintained by the appropriate Authorities.

(3.) We are of the view that while exercising discretion of granting ex-parte ad- interim order of injunction learned Single Judge acted arbitrarily by putting a restraint on the property of the wife of the plaintiff which was not the subject-matter of the suit. As such later part of the impugned order cannot be sustained.