AKSHAY VINIMAY LLP Vs. NEERAJ BAJORIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appeals arise out of Order No.02 dated January 28, 2026, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Second Court at Alipore in Title Suit No.120 of 2026, granting ex parte ad interim injunction restraining the defendant nos.1 to 13, defendant nos.17 to 23 and defendant nos.25 to 27 and/or their men, agents, assignees and servants from dealing with the properties described in Schedule „A-1" of the temporary injunction application filed in the said suit so as to create third party rights in respect of the same, pursuant to the Memorandum of Settlement dated March 13, 2019, until further order. The said order was subsequently extended vide order dated February 27, 2026 till the next date, that is April 27, 2026.

(2.) Being aggrieved by the self-same order, Pawan Kumar Todi, defendant no.1 in the suit, has preferred FMAT No.64 of 2026, whereas defendant no.25, Akshay Vinimay LLP has preferred FMA No.250 of 2026.

(3.) Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant in FMAT No.64 of 2026, namely Pawan Kumar Todi (in brief, "PK") argues that the impugned order is devoid of reasons and is contrary to Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, "the Code"). It is contended that the learned Trial Judge erred in law and wrongly assumed the jurisdiction of the Testamentary Court in a bid to protect the purported rights of the plaintiffs/respondent no.1, Neeraj Bajoria in a pending probate proceeding in respect of the purported last Will and Testament of Nand Lal Todi (since deceased).