GULISTAN SAHKARI AWAS SAMITI LTD., LKO. THRU. SECY. & ANR. Vs. ADDL. DISTT. & SESSION JUDGE,CT.NO.9, LUCKNOW & 3 OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Manik Sinha, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Ram Karan Agarwal, learned counsel who has put in appearance on behalf of respondent nos. 3 and 4.

(2.) This petition challenges an order dated 19.12.2014 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Malihabad, District Lucknow in Regular Suit No.245 of 2013 filed by the petitioners against the defendants-respondent Nos. 3 and 4 whereby the application moved by the petitioners-plaintiffs under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. has been rejected. The petitioners have also challenged the order passed by the appellate court on 01.03.2016 whereby the appeal preferred by them against the order dated 19.12.2014 passed by the learned trial court has been dismissed.

(3.) The facts of the case are that a suit for permanent injunction has been filed by the petitioners against the defendants in respect of plot no. 76/1, having an area of 15 biswan, situate at village/ mohalla Barora Husainbari, Lucknow. In the said suit, an application seeking interim injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. was filed. However, the said application has been rejected by the learned trial court. The learned trial court while rejecting the said application moved by the petitioners has considered the order passed in earlier suit. In respect of property in suit, the father of the defendants had instituted a civil suit wherein application moved by the father of the defendants under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. was allowed on 21.12.1995 against which the petitioners preferred an appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 , CPC, namely, Civil Misc.Appeal No.3 of 1996, which too, has been dismissed.