PATEL BINDUBEN PINKESHKUMAR Vs. PATEL BADEVBHAI KACHRABHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.J.V. Japee, learned advocate for the petitioner.

(2.) In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the order dtd. 6/7/2021 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijapur, Mehsana in Regular Civil Suit No.35 of 2021 whereunder ex-pare interim injunction in terms of prayer made in Exhibit 5 application is granted till the disposal of application Exhibit 5.

(3.) Mr.Japee, learned advocate submits that the petitioner has two children, who are also entitled to their share in the subject properties. He submits that the children of the petitioner has not impleaded as party defendants in the suit. He further submits that therefore, the suit is not maintainable as necessary parties are not impleaded on the ground of non-joinder of parties. He submits that because of ex-parte impugned injunction order, the LIC policy money with the petitioner is entitled to upon death of husband is also held up. He submits that order 39 Rule 3 of the Code, requires the Court to pass reason order for granting ex-parte ad interim injunction. However, the impugned order is without necessary reasons. He submits that even the learned trial Judge has recorded in the impugned order that the subject properties are in the name of the deceased husband of the petitioner. He therefore, submits that impugned order is unwarranted. According to his submission, that is an extreme urgency, the trial Court is giving long dates. Though according to his instructions, the pleadings are completed. He, therefore, submits that the petition requires consideration.