RAJ KUMAR JAIN Vs. VIVEK KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY preferring this appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of CPC the order dated 25.02.2011 passed by learned District Judge Narsinghpur in Civil Suit No.1-A/2011 has been assailed by the defendants whereby the learned Trial Court has allowed the plaintiff's application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC and restrained the defendants/appellants from alienating the suit property.

(2.) THE facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that a suit of declaration and injunction in regard to immovable property, the description whereof has been mentioned in the plaint, has been filed by the plaintiff claiming a relief that he is having 1/4 th share in the entire suit property. An application for issuance of temporary injunction was also filed by him praying that during the pendency of the suit, the defendants be restrained from alienating the suit property.

(3.) THE contention of learned counsel for appellants is that although the property is owned by Raj Kumar Jain/defendant No.1 but even if for the sake of argument the relief which has been prayed by the plaintiff is taken into account at the most plaintiff is entitled for temporary injunction upto � part in the suit property and therefore the impugned order be set aside.