IBRAHIM Vs. RASHIDAN BEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dtd. 19/4/2023 passed by the IVth Civil Judge, Junior Division, District-Shajapur in RCSA-33/2023, whereby the petitioner's application filed under Sec. 151 of the CPC for consideration of their application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the CPC seeking injunction restraining the respondent/defendant No.1 from alienating the suit properties during the pendency of the case has been rejected.

(2.) On perusal of the impugned order, it is found that the learned Judge of the trial court has noted that the respondent No.1 has marked her presence on 19/4/2023 itself and, thus, the court has found that without affording any opportunity of hearing to the respondent, it would not be proper to pass the order. Hence, the matter has been adjourned to 3/5/2023.

(3.) To support his submissions, counsel for the petitioners has a relied upon the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Maharwal Khewaji Trust (Regd.), Faridkot v. Baldev Dass repored as AIR 2005 (NOC) 414 (RAJ):: AIR 2005 SC 104; Rame Gowda (D) by L.Rs.V.M. Varadappa Naidu (D) by L.Rs.and another reported as AIR 2004 SC 4609 2004 AIR SCW 4205 and Ram Dhani and others v. Raja Ram and others reported as AIR 2011 Allahabad 121 :: (2011) 113 REVDEC 657