RAJESH PATEL Vs. RAJENDRA PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is the order dated 08.05.2013 passed by the learned 11th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Anand below Exh. 5 in Special Civil Suit No. 57 of 2013 whereby, the learned trial Judge rejected the injunction application Exh. 5 preferred by the plaintiffs - appellants herein.

(2.) THE parties to the present proceedings would be referred to as per their original status in the plaint for convenience.

(3.) THE learned trial Judge, after considering the pleadings, documentary evidence and after hearing submissions made at bar, rejected the injunction application Exh. 5. It is observed by the learned trial Judge that the suit land belongs to the HUF of said Mr. Vasantlal; that the plaintiffs are guilty of suppression of facts viz -a -viz the existence of Ghanshyam Mill and Narayan Textile Mill on the suit land; that the plaintiffs failed to aver as to how they claimed 1/8th share in the suit land; that the plaintiffs have not mutated their names in the revenue records in respect of rights accrued in favour of them by virtue of Will of deceased - Mr. Vinodchandra and thus, mandatory provisions contained under Section 135(c) of the Bombay Land Revenue Code are not complied with by the plaintiffs; that the Court has no jurisdiction to deal with the relief in respect of the suit land; that out of entire suit land, some portion is auctioned by D.R.T. and, therefore, the plaintiffs ought to have challenged the order of D.R.T. by way of appropriate proceedings and, therefore, the present suit is not maintainable as efficacious remedy against the proceedings of D.R.T. is available; that suit is barred by Section 41(h) of the Specific Relief Act; that the suit is barred by non -joinder of necessary parties as female members are omitted to be impleaded as party in the present suit and also Ghanshyam Mill, Narayan Textile Mill and Rajendra Textile Mill and at the end, the learned trial Judge found that the plaintiffs have failed to prove all the required ingredients of Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.