SHAHIDA Vs. MOHD MAHMOOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by order dated 7.1.2010 passed by District Judge, Hoshangabad in Civil Suit No. 15-A/2009, Appellants have preferred this appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) The facts of the case in short are that Plaintiffs/Respondents No. 1 to 3 filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against Defendants/ Appellants. Defendants/Appellants have also filed counter claim for permanent injunction. Thereafter, Plaintiffs/Respondents No. 1 to 3 have filed an application (IA No. 1) under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure and Defendants No. 3 and 4 also filed (2) applications (IA Nos. 2 and 3) under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, which were disposed of by learned trial Court by common impugned order dated 7.1.2010.

(3.) The averments of aforementioned applications are that Plaintiffs/Respondents No. 1 to 3 pleaded that they are the title holder of disputed land situated at Gram Samalwadakala, Tehsil Itarsi and they are also in possession thereof and cultivating the land continuously . They further pleaded that Defendant No. 1/Appellant No. 4 is uncle of the Plaintiffs. According to them, he, by practicing fraud, got mutated name of Defendant No. 2/Appellant No. 5 Mohd. Ishtiyaq in the revenue records. They further pleaded that Defendants No. 1 and 2 executed the illegal sale deed of 2.206 hactare out of Khasra Nos. 339 and 343 and 2.207 hactares out of Khasra Nos. 341, 343/2 and 381 in favour of Defendant No. 4/Appellant No. 2 and Defendant No. 3/Appellant No. 1 respectively. It has been further pleaded that on the basis of aforementioned sale deeds, Defendants No. 3 and 4 with cooperation of Defendants No. 1 and 2 tried to take possession of disputed land from Plaintiffs/Respondents No. 1 to 3, therefore, they pray for temporary injunction against them.