RAJESHWARI Vs. SUDHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present miscellaneous petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is taking exception to the order dtd. 11/4/2023 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Additional District Judge, Lahar, District Bhind, whereby the miscellaneous appeal preferred under Order 43 Rule 1 CPC by respondent has been allowed and order dtd. 2/3/2023 passed by the trial Court whereby an application of petitioners/plaintiffs under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC was allowed, has been set aside.

(2.) As pleaded and submitted, a suit for permanent injunction under Sec. 38 of the Specific Relief Act has been preferred by the petitioners/plaintiffs on the basis of submissions that out of the joint family property situated as per the particulars given in the plaint, part of it was purchased by the respondent/defendant from the plaintiffs. They intended to construct over the land in question and therefore, the suit was filed by the plaintiffs to restrain the defendant from construction on the ground that suit property is a joint family property and unless partition is made in metes and bounds specifying the area of each co- sharers, construction could not have been carried out.

(3.) Alongwith plaint, an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC was preferred seeking temporary injunction. The First Civil Judge, Junior Division Class - I, Lahar, District Bhind passed the order and allowed the application for temporary injunction on the ground that the suit property has not been partitioned and no demarcation has been made, therefore it is difficult to decipher the exact area of each co- sharers on the basis of four corners (prqZlhek) and since demarcated area has not been ascertained therefore, construction by defendant would alter the status quo. Therefore, temporary injunction was granted.