SUMATI GANPAT MAHAJAN Vs. PRABHAKAR LAXMAN DHAGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Shetye, learned Advocate for Applicants and Mr. Kamble, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1(a) to 1(d).

(2.) By consent of parties, present Civil Revision Application is taken up for final hearing. Revision Applicants are Defendants before Trial Court. Respondents - Plaintiffs filed Suit being Reg. Civil Suit No. 53/2014 against original Defendants. Org. Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 expired in the interregnum and their legal heirs are the Revision Applicants before me along with original Defendant No. 3. Original Plaintiff has also expired and legal heirs are the Plaintiffs in the Suit.Original Defendant No. 1 is the mother of Defendants. Defendants are aggrieved with the rejection of their application filed below Exh. 128 under O. VII R. 11(d) of the CPC. Defendants sought rejection of the Suit plaint in the facts and circumstances governing the dispute between the parties.

(3.) Learned Trial Court while passing the impugned order rejected the Application despite returning a finding that the contention of Defendants is a valid ground for rejection of injunction. Plaintiff has filed Suit seeking relief of perpetual injunction and nothing more. Suit plaint is annexed at Exh. A to CRA. Prayer clause (a) in paragraph No.16 of the Suit plaint seeks perpetual injunction against Defendants from disturbing possession of Plaintiffs or creating any disturbance with possession in respect of Suit property. Prayer (b) is a consequential declaratory relief sought by Plaintiffs seeking injunction against Defendants from dispossessing Plaintiffs from the Suit property. Reliefs prayed for in the Suit are on the premise that Plaintiffs are in possession of Suit lands. Suit lands are described in paragraph No. 2 of Suit plaint being agricultural lands bearing Survey Nos. 75/1 (part) and 75/3 (part) and 75/4, totally ad-measuring 1 H 44 R and 2 H 02 R situated at Village Yashwant Nagar, Taluka Vikramgad, Dist. Thane (now Dist. Palghar).